2024Journal of Environmental ManagementOpen access

Biofiltration of gaseous mixtures of dimethyl sulfide, dimethyl disulfide and dimethyl trisulfide: Effect of operational conditions and microbial analysis

José Joaquín González‐Cortés, Paula Alejandra Lamprea-Pineda, Martín Ramírez, Kristof Demeestere, Herman Van Langenhove, Christophe Walgraeve

Open full text 11 citations

Abstract

The efficient removal of volatile sulfur compounds (VSCs), such as dimethyl sulfide (DMS), dimethyl disulfide (DMDS) and dimethyl trisulfide (DMTS), is crucial due to their foul odor and corrosive potential in sewer systems. Biofilters (BFs) offer promise for VSCs removal, but face challenges related to pH control and changing conditions at full scale. Two BFs, operated under acidophilic conditions for 78 days, were evaluated for their performance at varying inlet concentrations and empty bed residence times (EBRTs). BF1, incorporating 4–6 mm marble limestone for pH control, outperformed BF2, which used NaHCO3 in the nutrient solution. BF1 displayed better resilience, maintained a stable pH of 4.6 ± 0.6, and achieved higher maximum elimination capacities (ECmax, 41 mg DMS m−3 h−1 (RE 38.3%), 146 mg DMDS m−3 h−1 (RE 83.1%), 47 mg DMTS m−3 h−1 (RE 93.1%)) at an EBRT of 56 s compared to BF2 (9 mg DMS m−3 h−1 (RE 7.1%), 9 mg DMDS m−3 h−1 (RE 4.8%) and 11 mg DMTS m−3 h−1 (RE 26.6%)). BF2 exhibited pH stratification and decreased performance after feeding interruptions. The biodegradability of VSCs followed the order DMTS > DMDS > DMS, and several microorganisms were identified contributing to VSCs degradation in BF1, including Bacillus (14%), Mycobacterium (11%), Acidiphilium (7%), and Acidobacterium (3%).

About this research paper

What this paper is about

The efficient removal of volatile sulfur compounds (VSCs), such as dimethyl sulfide (DMS), dimethyl disulfide (DMDS) and dimethyl trisulfide (DMTS), is crucial due to their foul odor and corrosive potential in sewer systems. Biofilters (BFs) offer promise for VSCs removal, but face challenges related to pH control and changing conditions at full scale. Two BFs, operated under acidophilic conditions for 78 days, were evaluated for their performance at varying inlet concentrations and empty bed residence times (EBRTs). BF1, incorporating 4–6 mm marble limestone for pH control, outperformed BF2, which used NaHCO3 in the nutrient solution. BF1 displayed better resilience, maintained a stable pH of 4.6 ± 0.6, and achieved higher maximum elimination capacities (ECmax, 41 mg DMS m−3 h−1 (RE 38.3%), 146 mg DMDS m−3 h−1 (RE 83.1%), 47 mg DMTS m−3 h−1 (RE 93.1%)) at an EBRT of 56 s compared to BF2 (9 mg DMS m−3 h−1 (RE 7.1%), 9 mg DMDS m−3 h−1 (RE 4.8%) and 11 mg DMTS m−3 h−1 (RE 26.6%)). BF2 exhibited pH stratification and decreased performance after feeding interruptions. The biodegradability of VSCs followed the order DMTS > DMDS > DMS, and several microorganisms were identified contributing to VSCs degradation in BF1, including Bacillus (14%), Mycobacterium (11%), Acidiphilium (7%), and Acidobacterium (3%).

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 11 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

The efficient removal of volatile sulfur compounds (VSCs), such as dimethyl sulfide (DMS), dimethyl disulfide (DMDS) and dimethyl trisulfide (DMTS), is crucial due to their foul odor and corrosive potential in sewer systems. Biofilters (BFs) offer promise for VSCs removal, but face challenges related to pH control and changing conditions at full scale. Two BFs, operated under acidophilic conditions for 78 days, were evaluated for their performance at varying inlet concentrations and empty bed residence times (EBRTs). BF1, incorporating 4–6 mm marble limestone for pH control, outperformed BF2, which used NaHCO3 in the nutrient solution. BF1 displayed better resilience, maintained a stable pH of 4.6 ± 0.6, and achieved higher maximum elimination capacities (ECmax, 41 mg DMS m−3 h−1 (RE 38.3%), 146 mg DMDS m−3 h−1 (RE 83.1%), 47 mg DMTS m−3 h−1 (RE 93.1%)) at an EBRT of 56 s compared to BF2 (9 mg DMS m−3 h−1 (RE 7.1%), 9 mg DMDS m−3 h−1 (RE 4.8%) and 11 mg DMTS m−3 h−1 (RE 26.6%)). BF2 exhibited pH stratification and decreased performance after feeding interruptions. The biodegradability of VSCs followed the order DMTS > DMDS > DMS, and several microorganisms were identified contributing to VSCs degradation in BF1, including Bacillus (14%), Mycobacterium (11%), Acidiphilium (7%), and Acidobacterium (3%).

Key concepts: Dimethyl disulfide, Dimethyl trisulfide, Dimethyl sulfide, Methanethiol, Chemistry, Microbial consortium, Biofilter, Sulfur

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Biofiltration of gaseous mixtures of dimethyl sulfide, dimethyl disulfide and dimethyl trisulfide: Effect of operational conditions and microbial analysis — Research Paper | ScholarLens