Desalination 245 (2009) 451459

Demonstration of a treatment system for purification and

reuse of laundry wastewater
I. Ciabattia,*,1, F. Cesarob, L. Farallia, E. Fatarellaa, F. Tognottia
a

Next Technology Tecnotessile Societ Nazionale di Ricerca r.l., via del Gelso 13, 59100 Prato, Italy
Tel. +39-0574-634040; Fax +39-0574-634045; email: chemtech@tecnotex.it
b
Studio Tecnoacque, Via Roma 78, 35040 Boara Pisani (Padova), Italy
Received 17 June 2008; revised 06 February 2009; accepted 09 February 2009

Abstract
A pre-industrial scale experimentation aimed at the demonstration of a system for purification and reuse of
wastewater from an industrial laundry was carried out by means of a prototype plant installed in situ, fed with 15
m3/h of untreated wastewater. The tested treatment system consisted of: (i) physico-chemical pre-treatment (coagulation, flocculation and Dissolved Air Flotation or DAF); (ii) sand filtration; (iii) ozonation; (iv) Granular Activated Carbon (GAC) filtration and (v) cross-flow ultrafiltration (UF) on flat membranes realised in polyvinyledene
fluoride (PVDF). Under the optimised treatment conditions, it was demonstrated that the outlet of the GAC filter
meets the requiring law limits for discharge to surface waters in Italy, even in terms of residual content of total surfactants (<2 mg/L). The post-treatment of ultrafiltration on flat membranes further reduced the residual pollutant
content, allowing reuse of the treated effluents in some washing processes of home textiles, as demonstrated by
whiteness index measurements. A cost analysis was performed to assess the operating costs of each treatment step.
Keywords: Industrial laundry effluent; Ozonation; Activated carbon filtration; Membrane filtration; Purification;
Reuse

1. Introduction
Water has always played a major role in industrial laundry operations, due to the large quantity
of this universal solvent required for the effective
*Corresponding author.

laundering of industrial garments and other textile goods. On the average, a laundry uses 15 L
of water to process 1 kg of work and discharges
a total of 400 m3 of wastewater daily. Treatment
of this kind of wastewater is particularly difficult
because of the high surfactant content, together

Present address: European Commission, Research Executive Agency, rue de la Loi 200, 1049 Brussels, Belgium.
Tel. +32-2-2994247; email: ingrid.ciabatti@ec.europa.eu
Presented at the conference Engineering with Membranes 2008; Membrane Processes: Development, Monitoring and
Modelling From the Nano to the Macro Scale (EWM 2008), May 2528, 2008, Vale do Lobo, Algarve, Portugal.
0011-9164/09/$ See front matter 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi: 10.1016/j.desal.2009.02.008

452

I. Ciabatti et al. / Desalination 245 (2009) 451459

with the high organic and inorganic load generated by the soil that has been washed out. It has
been reported that wastewater from a laundry,
where very dirty items are being washed, contains mineral oils, heavy metals and dangerous
substances that have chemical oxygen demand
(COD) values of 120020,000 mg/L, whilst
laundries that wash items from households and
hotels generate effluents with COD values of
4001200 mg/L [1].
Different methods of pre-treatment are used
to purify industrial laundry wastewater before it
is discharged. The complexity of pre-treatment
varies from location to location depending on
the size of the facility, the volume of water and
chemicals consumed, the type and usage of
products used by the customers being serviced,
and the specifics of national and local law
requirements.
One of the most widely used pre-treatments of
industrial laundry wastewater consists of coagulation and flocculation, followed by Dissolved
Air Flotation (DAF). Coagulation is a wellknown treatment which, by addition of a chemical (such as Al3+ and Fe3+ salts or organic
polymers), destabilises small particles in suspension. Such particles after electrical neutralisation tend to gather and form coagulated flocs of
2050 m in size. Flocculation reagents, consisting of long-chain polymers or polyelectrolytes,
reinforce the floc formation and cohesion [2].
Flotation allows then to separate the flocs from
the liquid; as solid/liquid separation system, flotation is preferred to settling being the coagulums
very light [3].
The coagulationflocculationflotation system may be insufficient for treating the highly
variable industrial laundering effluents in
agreement with the legislation for wastewater
discharge in force in the European Union (EU)
Member States. In particular, with this kind of
treatment process, industrial launderers might
periodically exceed the values of parameters
such as suspended solids and Biochemical

Oxygen Demand (BOD) and therefore incur

in the related municipal sewer surcharges. This
fact, together with increasing costs associated
with water supply in the EU, is dictating the
need for European industrial launderers to
address water conservation and recycling as
matters of increasing priority.
In this framework, the present paper refers to
a pre-industrial scale validation of a treatment
system for reuse of industrial laundry effluents
realised within the European project PROWATER, that has been co-financed by the European
Commission within the LIFE Environment Programme. The investigated treatment system was
composed of: (i) physico-chemical pre-treatment
(coagulation, flocculation and DAF); (ii) sand filtration; (iii) ozonation; (iv) Granular Activated
Carbon (GAC) filtration and (v) ultrafiltration
(UF) on flat membranes.
Ozonation is considered one of the most
promising oxidation processes with which to
control the levels of organic pollutants in water.
It can also be used for the removal of inorganic
species, as an aid to the coagulationflocculation processes [4]. It has been found that the
reaction between ozone and water pollutants
occurs either by direct oxidation (pH < 6) or by
an indirect pathway (pH > 6), whereby
hydroxyl radicals resulting from the decomposition of ozone serve as oxidants through chain
reactions [5]. Because of its strong oxidative
properties, ozone has been investigated for
treatment of several types of wastewater, e.g.
effluents containing phenols [6,7], pesticides
[8,9] and dyes [10,11].
Activated carbon, also called activated charcoal or activated coal, is a general term which
covers carbon material derived from sources
such as almonds, coconuts, walnut hulls, other
woods and coal. It is a particularly good adsorbent medium thanks to its high surface area-tovolume ratio: 1 g of a typical commercial
activated carbon will have a surface area equivalent to 1000 m2. Adsorption on GAC has been

453

I. Ciabatti et al. / Desalination 245 (2009) 451459

found to be an effective technology for treating

water contaminated with taste and odour-causing
compounds, organic chemicals, chlorinated compounds and even metals [1214]. The superiority
of activated carbons in the removal of surfactants
from laundry effluents compared to other adsorbents has been reported in literature [15]. The
proper selection of cost-effective GAC and the
operational parameters of the filtration are critical to the successful operation of large-scale
GAC adsorbers.
Ultrafiltration is a pressure-driven membrane
technique that is used for the separation from a
liquid of material in the 1 nm to 10 m size range
(Molecular Weight Cut Off, or MWCO, of about
2000500,000). It is widely used in drinking
water [16,17] and wastewater [18,19] treatment.
In the field of textile effluent purification, it has
been mainly proposed as pre-treatment to nanofiltration (NF) or reverse osmosis (RO) for wastewater reuse [20,21]. The UF+RO combination
has also been investigated on lab scale for reuse
of laundry effluents [1].
A combination of the technologies presented
in this paper (with the exception of GAC filtration) was successfully validated on pre-industrial scale for the treatment and reuse of real
dyeing [22] and finishing [23] effluents. The
objective of the experimentation described here
has been to adapt and optimise such approach to
wastewater originated by laundry operations,
leading to the demonstration of a treatment system applicable to several kinds of industrial
effluents.

2. Materials and methods

2.1. Wastewater characteristics
The industrial laundry participating in this
study LIT S.r.l. (Turin, Italy) is specialised in
wet washing of textiles made of vegetable fibres,
animal fibres, man-made fibres and their mixtures.
Each day LIT washes some 22 tons of textiles,
using both conventional washerextractors and
continuous-batch washers. The production cycle
requires a total of 400 m3/day of water. At present,
the water needs of the company are covered by
wells. Before being fed to the laundry machinery,
well water is softened by ion exchange resins and
then collected in a storage tank.
In addition to surfactants, the washing cycle
foresees the use of other chemicals such as softeners, oxidants/disinfectants (sodium hypochlorite and hydrogen peroxide), alkali, acetic acid,
oxalic acid, formic acid, which are found as pollutants in the resulting wastewater. Table 1 reports
the typical range of some parameters of the endof-pipe laundry effluents considered in the study.
2.2. Products
As primary coagulant, both aluminium polychloride and a commercial mixture of it were
tested. In both cases, different dosages were
investigated by preliminary jar tests to select the
best product and the best conditions, which were
then verified by pre-industrial scale tests.
As secondary coagulant, a polyamine-based
product was used. Again, different dosages were

Table 1
Characteristics of the kind of stream investigated

pH

COD
(mg/L)

Total suspended
solids
(mg/L)

79

4001000

90200

Nephelometric turbidity unit.

Turbidity
(NTU)a

Conductivity
(S/cm)

40150

13003000

Absorbance at
420 nm

Non-ionic
surfactants
(BIAS)
(mg/L)

Anionic
surfactants
(MBAS)
(mg/L)

0.010.05

110

115

454

I. Ciabatti et al. / Desalination 245 (2009) 451459

investigated by jar tests and the best conditions

were validated by pre-industrial scale trials.
Considering both the technical and economic
issues, the best solution was found to be the addition of 750 parts per million (ppm) of aluminium
polychloride as primary coagulant and the addition of 90 ppm of polyamine-based product as
secondary coagulant. An anionic polyelectrolyte
was dosed on-line as flocculant (addition: 3 ppm)
in the prototype.
Ozone was produced from a generator fed
with liquid oxygen (maximum ozone production:
550 g/h); additions ranging from 30 to 90 ppm
were tested. The addition of 40 ppm of ozone was
found to be the most suitable one, considering
both the technical and economic aspects.
Alkaline solutions added with sodium
hypochlorite were used for chemical cleaning of
the UF membranes.
2.3. Large-scale prototype
A large-scale prototype (maximum water feed:
15 m3/h) was installed at LIT in order to validate
on-site the proposed system for treatment and
reuse of laundry effluents. Upstream the prototype, a metallic grid (0.75 mm) was used to
remove the coarse materials.
The prototype consisted of the following sections: (1) coagulation, flocculation and dissolved
air flotation; (3) sand filtration; (4) ozonation and
(5) GAC filtration. Ozone was introduced into the
wastewater stream by ceramic dishes. Part of the
effluent of the GAC filter (0.7 m3/h) was fed to a
UF Flamec module by Filterpar (Italy), featuring
commercial cross-flow flat membranes (total filtration area: 48 m2). The membranes of this system are made of polyvinyledene fluoride (PVDF)
and have a Molecular Weight Cut-Off (MWCO)
of 20 kDa. Permeation is realised by an extraction
pump working under vacuum. The liquid to be
filtered is partly re-circulated by a low head
pump. The hydraulic performance of the UF section of the prototype was monitored over time.

2.4. UF membrane cleaning

An optimised chemical cleaning procedure
was applied for the maintenance of the filtration
performance of the UF membranes. In particular,
the chemical cleaning was realised when a reduction of 20% of the normalised permeate flux was
observed.
The adopted cleaning protocol realised with
chemicals from Everblue S.r.l. is described
below:
1. Alkali cleaning for biofilm removal with 20
L solution of 1%v/v of EB-Cleaner B1 and
1%v/v of EB-Cleaner B2 at pH = 11 and at
T = 40C. A 20% of the solution is fluxed
through the membranes and re-circulated for
at least 2 h.
2. Non-oxidant biocide for fungi and bacterium
removal with a 20 L solution of 0.02%v/v of
EB-Biocide 10 at T = 40C. A 20% of the
solution is fluxed through the membranes and
re-circulated for at least 0.5 h.
3. Iron and organic deposit removal with 20 L
solution of 1%v/v of EB-Cleaner B1 and
1%v/v of EB-Cleaner B2 at pH = 11 and at
T = 40C. A 20% of the solution is fluxed
through the membranes and re-circulated for
at least 2 h.
4. Acid cleaning for iron and inorganic deposit
removal with a 20 L solution of 2%v/v of
EB-Cleaner A1 at T = 40 C. A 20% of the
solution is fluxed trough the membranes and
re-circulated for at least 2 h.
2.5. Effluent analyses
The following parameters of interest were
determined on untreated effluents and after the
different purification steps of the system: pH;
temperature; COD, according to test method DIN
38409; turbidity, as per IRSA 2120; Total Suspended Solids (TSS), according to IRSA 2050;
conductivity; absorbance at 420 nm; anionic surfactants, as Methylene Blue Active Substances

Permeability [L/(m2h bar)]

I. Ciabatti et al. / Desalination 245 (2009) 451459

455

45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Permeate production [m3]

Fig. 1. Trend of the UF membrane permeability when filtering laundry effluents at LIT.

(MBAS) determined as per ISO 7875-1; nonionic surfactants by the Bismuth Active Substance (BIAS) method. In some cases, other
parameters of interest were measured, e.g. ammonia nitrogen, according to test method DIN 38406
and total phosphorous, according to test method
DIN 38408.
2.6. Reuse tests
One hundred per cent UF permeate was used
in washing experiments of home textiles realised
with a washerextractor processing 100 kg of textiles. The final rinsing was realised using softened
well water.
The experiments with the UF permeate were
compared to the same kind of processes realised
with primary water. The white index of the

washed textiles was determined as per [24], to

provide a quantitative assessment of the tests.
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Ultrafiltration performance
The UF membranes featured a pure water permeability of 84 L/(hm2bar).
Figure 1 shows the trend of the membrane
permeability when filtering the laundry effluents pre-treated by flotation, ozonation and
GAC filtration (mean parameters of the membrane feed are presented in Table 2 as GAC filter outlet). As shown in the figure, after
filtration of about 20 m3 of wastewater, the permeability to the laundry effluents decreased of
about 25% compared to the initial value of the

Table 2
Mean values of some parameters of interest for the prototype influent, the outlet of the GAC filter and the UF permeate

Parameter
pH
COD (mg/L O2)
TSS (mg/L)
Turbidity (NTU)
Conductivity (S/cm)
Ammonia nitrogen (mg/L NH4+)
Total phosphorous (mg/L P)
Total surfactants (mg/L)

Influent

Outlet GAC filter

UF permeate

7.2
602
166
110
1342
1.8
1.9
8.78

7.4
140
4
1.1
1275
0.13
0.45
1.60

7.3
81
2.5
0.8
1127

1.00

Limits for
discharge to Values for
surface water
reuse
5.59.5
<160
<80

<15
<10
<2

6.58.5
<100
<5
<2
<2000

<20

I. Ciabatti et al. / Desalination 245 (2009) 451459

Removal efficiency

456
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%

COD

Outlet flotation tank Outlet ozonation tank

Outlet GAC filter

UF permeate

Fig. 2. COD removal efficiency from laundry wastewater after the different purification steps realised in series by the
prototype at LIT.

test, as the membranes had became fouled.

Membrane fouling could be explained by the
adsorption of residual surfactants onto the
membranes, due to both hydrophobic and electrostatic interactions in case of ionic surfactants. On this regard, it is to be noticed that
anionic surfactants are widely used in washing
operations, as they are particularly effective at
oily soil cleaning and clay soil suspension, and
therefore they are found in higher concentration
in the resulting effluent compared to the nonionic surfactants (Table 1).
To limit membrane clogging, periodic regenerations of the membranes with washing solutions featuring alkali were realised after
permeation cycles of about 100 m3 of water.

3.2. Pollutant removal efficiency

Water quality parameters were controlled by
means of sampling of both the prototype influent
(equalised end-of-pipe wastewater) and the outlets of the different sections of the prototype, connected in series, in order to monitor their
contribution to the overall performance of the
treatment system.
For the main parameters of interest, Figs. 2
4 report the removal efficiency , that was
calculated according to the equation: (%)
= (C0 CF)/C0 100, where C0 is the initial

concentration of the pollutant and CF is the final

value. To be noted that C0 is always referred to
the prototype influent (untreated wastewater
after pH regulation by H2SO4 and homogenisation), whilst CF relates to the effluent of the
considered treatment section.
A mean COD removal efficiency of 87% was
obtained with the overall system (Fig. 2). The
physico-chemical pre-treatment alone has a COD
removal efficiency of 45%. Thanks to the following sand filtration, ozonation and GAC filtration,
total COD removal efficiency reached 77%,
meeting the Italian legal limit for discharge to
surface waters (160 mg/L). Finally, UF allowed
to further decrease the residual COD, reaching an
average value < 100 mg/L, as wished by the
involved industrial laundry to realise a partial
wastewater reuse.
The purification system also reached a high
removal efficiency of TSS (98%) and turbidity
(99%), as shown in Fig. 3. The physico-chemical pre-treatment played a major role in removing these parameters (removal efficiency of 88%
and 94% for TSS and turbidity, respectively).
This was possible thanks to the selection of
proper coagulants and to the use of relatively
high doses, needed to limit the ozone consumption (and related cost) in the downstream ozonation step. Thanks to the following treatments of
sand filtration, ozonation and GAC filtration,
TSS and turbidity were almost completely

I. Ciabatti et al. / Desalination 245 (2009) 451459

TSS

457

Turbidity

Removal efficiency

100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Outlet flotation
tank

Outlet ozonation
tank

Outlet GAC filter

UF permeate

Fig. 3. Removal efficiency of total suspended solids and turbidity from laundry wastewater after the different purification
steps realised in series by the prototype at LIT.

Colour and microbiological analyses confirmed the good performance of the proposed
system.
Table 2 reports the mean values of some
parameters of interest which relate to: (A) prototype influent; (B) outlet of the GAC filter; (C) UF
permeate; versus both the Italian legal limits for
discharge to surface waters and the target values
for partial reuse in washing processes defined by
the laundry participating in the study. As shown
by the table, the outlet of the GAC filter met the
Italian legal limits for discharge to surface water,
whilst the target values for reuse were reached
thanks to the final UF treatment.

removed, hence UF had almost no effect on

these parameters.
Decrease in total surfactants was also significant: mean removal efficiency of 87% and 93%
for non-ionic and anionic surfactants, respectively, were obtained (Fig. 4). For these parameters, an important contribution came from
ozonation and GAC filtration, allowing to meet
the Italian legal limit for discharge to surface
water (total surfactants < 2 mg/L). A further
reduction occurred by UF (surfactants decreased
of the half compared to UF feed), possibly
explaining the fouling by their adsorption onto
the membrane.

Removal efficiency

BIAS

MBAS

100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Outlet flotation tank Outlet ozonation
tank

Outlet GAC filter

UF permeate

Fig. 4. Removal efficiency of non-ionic surfactants (as BIAS) and anionic surfactants (as MBAS) from laundry wastewater after the different purification steps realised in series by the prototype at LIT.

458

I. Ciabatti et al. / Desalination 245 (2009) 451459

3.3. Reuse tests

Washing tests of home textiles including bed
linen and wipes were carried out with the UF
permeate to verify the possibility to realise a partial wastewater reuse. The final rinsing was
realised with primary water. According to both the
visual check of the washed items by the technicians of the laundry and the measurements of the
white index (in case of bed linen, equal to 100.946
when using primary water and to 102.528 when
using the UF permeate), it has been demonstrated
that the proposed treatment system allows to produce an effluent suitable for reuse.
3.4. Cost assessment
A cost assessment of the proposed system was
carried out. It resulted that the maximum operating costs for the different treatment sections are:
(i) physico-chemical pre-treatment: 0.42
Euro/m3; (ii) sand filtration: 0.04 Euro/m3; (iii)
ozonation: 0.10 Euro/m3; (iv) GAC filtration:
0.09 Euro/m3; (v) UF: 0.16 Euro/m3. Hence, the
total operating costs of the proposed approach
amount to 0.81 Euro/m3.
4. Conclusions
Under tested conditions, a purification system
composed of: physico-chemical pre-treatment;
sand filtration; ozonation and GAC filtration;
allows to meet the requiring law limits for discharge to surface waters in Italy. A post-treatment of ultrafiltration on flat PVDF membranes
allows reuse of the treated effluents in some
washing processes; however, the need for a frequent membrane chemical washing has to be
taken into account when considering a full scale
implementation.
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to thank the LIFE Environment Programme of the European Commission

for co-financing the PROWATER project, which

has received an award as Best of the Best LIFE
Environment Project 20072008. Edoardo Cornaglia and Bruno Villa (LIT S.r.l.) and all other
project partners are gratefully acknowledged for
their support.

References
[1] S. Sostar-Turk, I. Petrinic and M. Simonic, Laundry
wastewater treatment using coagulation and membrane filtration, Resou., Conser. Recyc., 44 (2005)
185196.
[2] M. Cox, P. Ngr and L. Yurramendi (Eds.), A
Guide Book on the Treatment of Effluents from the
Mining/Metallurgy, Paper, Plating and Textile
Industries, INASMET-Tecnalia, Madrid, 2006.
[3] J. Rubio, E. Carissimi and J.J. Rosa, Flotation in
water and wastewater treatment and reuse: recent
trends in Brazil, Int. J. Environ. Pollut., 30 (2)
(2007) 197212.
[4] Z. Laszlo and C. Hodur, Purification of thermal
wastewater by membrane separation and ozonation,
Desalination, 206 (13) (2007) 333340.
[5] J. Hoigne, The chemistry of ozone in water, in: S.
Stucki, (Ed.), Process Technologies for Water Treatment, Plenum Publishing Corporation, New York,
1998, pp. 121143.
[6] T. Poznyak and J. Vivero, Degradation of aqueous
phenol and chlorinated phenols by ozone, Ozone:
Sci. Eng., 27(6) (2005) 447458.
[7] P. Karageorgos, A. Coz, M. Charalabaki, N.
Kalogerakis, N.P. Xekoukoulotakis and D. Mantzavinos, Ozonation of weathered olive mill wastewaters, J. Chem. Technol. Biotechnol., 81 (9)
(2006) 15701576.
[8] L. Amir Tahmasseb, S. Nlieu, L. Kerhoas and J.
Einhorn, Ozonation of chlorophenylurea pesticides
in water: reaction monitoring and degradation pathways, Sci. Total Environ., 291 (1) (2002) 3344.
[9] V. Mezzanotte, R. Canziani, E. Sardi and L. Spada,
Removal of pesticides by a combined
ozonation/attached biomass process sequence,
Ozone: Sci. Eng., 27 (4) (2005) 327331.
[10] G. Ciardelli, I. Ciabatti, L. Ranieri, G. Capannelli
and A. Bottino, Membrane contactors for textile
wastewater ozonation, Ann. New York Acad. Sci.,
984 (2003) 2938.
[11] M.F. Sevimli and H.Z. Sarikaya, Effect of some
operational parameters on the decolorization of tex-

I. Ciabatti et al. / Desalination 245 (2009) 451459

[12]

[13]

[14]

[15]

[16]

[17]

[18]

tile effluents and dye solutions by ozonation, Environ. Technol., 26 (2) (2005) 135144.
T.C. Shih, M. Wangpaichitr and M. Suffet, Evaluation of granular activated carbon technology for the
removal of methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE) from
drinking water, Water Res., 37 (2) (2003) 375385.
S. Sorlini and C. Collivignarelli, Chlorite removal
with granular activated carbon, Desalination, 176
(13) (2005) 255265.
A. bin Jusoh, W.H. Cheng, W.M. Low and A.
Noraaini, Study on the removal of iron and manganese in groundwater by granular activated carbon,
Desalination, 182 (13) (2005) 347353.
N. Schouten, L.G. van der Ham, G.J. Euverink and
A.B. de Haan, Selection and evaluation of adsorbents for the removal of anionic surfactants from
laundry rinsing water, Water Res., 41 (18) (2007)
42334241.
B. Nicolaisen, Developments in membrane technology for water treatment, Desalination, 153 (1)
(2003) 355360.
A.V.R. Reddy, D. Jagan Mohan, P.R. Buch, S.V.
Joshi and P.K. Ghosh, Desalination and water
recovery: control of membrane fouling, Int. J. Nucl.
Desal., 2 (1) (2006) 103107.
Y.-S. Hong, H. Zhou and R.G. Zytner, Combining
ultrafiltration process with coagulation pretreatment
for pulp mill wastewater treatment, Environ. Technol., 28 (9) (2007) 9951006.

459

[19] C.A. Paraskeva, V.G. Papadakis, D.G. Kanellopoulou, P.G. Koutsoukos and K.C. Angelopoulos,
Membrane filtration of olive mill wastewater and
exploitation of its fractions, Water Environ. Res. 79
(4) (2007) 421429.
[20] M. Marcucci, I. Ciabatti, A. Matteucci and G. Vernaglione, Membrane technologies applied to textile
wastewater treatment, Ann. New York Acad. Sci.,
984 (2003) 5364.
[21] S. Barredo-Damas, M.I. Alcaina-Miranda, M.I.
Iborra-Clar, A. Bes-Pi, J.A. Mendoza-Roca and
A. Iborra-Clar, Study of the UF process as pretreatment of NF membranes for textile wastewater reuse, Desalination, 200 (13) (2006)
745747.
[22] F. Tognotti and I. Ciabatti, Reuse of dyeing wastewater by a large-scale purification treatment featuring ultrafiltration, Proceedings of the EU-Asia
Workshop on Clean Production and Nanotechnologies, Seoul, October 2006, pp. 5767.
[23] I. Ciabatti, Conoscere il processo di trattamento
delle acque reflue reimmesse nel ciclo produttivo:
lesperienza del settore tessile, Acque Reflue Industriali, Milan, February 2007.
[24] ASTM E313-05, Standard Practice for Calculating
Yellowness and Whiteness Indices from Instrumentally Measured Color Coordinates, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, USA, October
2005.