water

Article
Effectiveness of Nitrification and Denitrification
Processes in Biofilters Treating Wastewater from
De-Icing Airport Runways
Joanna Rodziewicz, Kamila Ostrowska, Wojciech Janczukowicz and Artur Mielcarek *
Department of Environment Engineering, Faculty of Environmental Sciences, University of Warmia and Mazury
in Olsztyn, Warszawska 117a, 10-719 Olsztyn, Poland; joanna.rodziewicz@uwm.edu.pl (J.R.);
kamila.c.ostrowska@gmail.com (K.O.); jawoj@uwm.edu.pl (W.J.)
* Correspondence: artur.mielcarek@uwm.edu.pl




Received: 6 February 2019; Accepted: 21 March 2019; Published: 26 March 2019


Abstract: The basic factors determining the efficiency of the removal of nitrogen and carbon
compounds from airport wastewater containing de-icing agents are low temperature and the C/N
ratio (carbon to nitrogen ratio). Biofilm reactors (biofilters) create better conditions for nitrification and
denitrification than suspended biomass reactors. The scope of the study included determination of the
influence of the C/N ratio in the wastewater on nitrification, denitrification and organic compound
removal in biofilm reactors depending on the temperature. The experiment was performed in
24 circular laboratory biofilters with LECA (Light Expanded Clay Aggregates) filling. The study was
divided into three series differing in organic carbon loading. In each series, carried out at the same
hydraulic retention time, biofilters were operated at 25, 8, 4 or 0 ◦ C. The study showed the effective
removal of nitrogen compounds across a very wide temperature range. The applied filling and
properly selected operating parameters of the reactors resulted in effective simultaneous nitrification
and denitrification. The highest efficiency of nitrogen removal at 0 ◦ C (34.57 ± 4.54%) was obtained
at the C/N ratio of 0.5 gC/gN. The efficiency of denitrification (the lowest at the temperature of 0 ◦ C)
increased as the temperature and C/N ratio increased in the wastewater.

Keywords: pavement de-icing agents; biofilters; LECA (Light Expanded Clay Aggregates); nitrogen
and carbon removal; nitrification and denitrification

1. Introduction
Chemical substances used for winter maintenance of airports are an important source of water
and land pollution [1,2]. Every winter, a significant amount of chemicals are used at the airport for
de-icing of aircraft and airport pavements to facilitate safe air travel. Even in small facilities, an
average of several hundred tons of de-icing agents are utilized during the season, the majority of
which penetrates with rainwater to the ground and water near the aerodrome. Chemicals commonly
used for winter maintenance of airport pavements include: urea, acetate and sodium formate in solid
form, and acetate and potassium formate in liquid form. The generated wastewater is contaminated
primarily by nitrogen and carbon compounds, while concentrations of phosphorus compounds do not
exceed the limit values [2].
The composition of wastewater produced during de-icing of airport pavements is determined by
meteorological phenomena, methods used to prevent freezing and de-icing [3] and the systems used
for wastewater collection and disposal. This wastewater is characterized by chemical oxygen demand
(COD) from several dozen to 630,000 mg O2 /dm3 , concentration of total nitrogen (Kjeldahl) from 0 to
600 mg/dm3 , concentration of total phosphorus below 1 mg/dm3 [4]. Therefore, the Environmental

Water 2019, 11, 630; doi:10.3390/w11030630 www.mdpi.com/journal/water

Water 2019, 11, 630 2 of 17

Protection Agency chose COD and total nitrogen as quality indicators of wastewater containing de-icing
agents [5]. The issue of wastewater treatment containing de-icing agents remains unresolved [6], which
results in penetration of most of these substances into the ground and water near airports [7]. Most airports
are not equipped with a wastewater treatment system. Only a few airports in the world have wetlands [8],
which effectively remove pollution from wastewater. However, wetlands create favorable environmental
conditions for birds [9], which may endanger airport operations. A significant environmental problem
associated with runoff wastewater containing de-icing agents is eutrophication and oxygen depletion in
receiver water [1], resulting in the death of aquatic invertebrates and fish and causing the loss of migratory
fish species [10].
The basic factor determining the efficiency of the removal of nitrogen and carbon compounds
from wastewater containing de-icing agents is the temperature, because both de-icing and wastewater
treatment takes place at low temperatures at the airport. Heterotrophic denitrification is also dependent
on access to easily available carbon compounds. The simultaneous use of de-icing agents such
as urea and easily decomposable organic compounds such as acetate or potassium formate at the
airport might facilitate the effective denitrification process as well as the effective removal of organic
compounds [1]. Temperature is one of the most important factors determining the metabolism
of nitrifying bacteria [11,12]. The optimal temperature range of wastewater for nitrification is
25–28 ◦ C, at which temperature, Nitrobacter sp. are more sensitive to environmental conditions
than Nitrosomonas sp. [13], thus a temperature below 8–10 ◦ C mainly inhibits the second phase of
nitrification, which results in the accumulation of nitrates in an effluent [14]. Nevertheless, nitrification
was also observed at very low temperatures of 1 ◦ C or 0.5 ◦ C [14] and reducing the wastewater
temperature resulted in a gradual decrease in the efficiency of oxidation of ammonium nitrogen.
The nitrification efficiency decreases from 90–94% at 15 ◦ C to about 55% at 2 ◦ C. Despite the possibility
of the growth of nitrifying microorganisms at low temperatures being confirmed by other studies, it is
commonly accepted that nitrification is effective above 15 ◦ C [15]. Hoilijoki et al. [16] observed that
complete nitrification below 5 ◦ C was possible only in a reactor with the immobilized microorganisms
that formed biofilm. Rostron et al. [17] noted that a reduction of the temperature from 25 ◦ C to
16 ◦ C decreased 10% of the nitrification efficiency in the reactor with biofilm, while the nitrification
efficiency decreased 58% in the reactor with suspended biomass. Literature data also shows that
the expanded-clay aggregate applied in biofilm reactors (biofilters) “buffers” changes in pH and
redox potential [18,19]. Few studies have investigated the effect of temperature on denitrification
which is temperature-dependent as a biochemical reaction [20]. The rate of denitrification increases
exponentially to 32–35 ◦ C [21]. The highest rate of the reduction of oxidized forms of nitrogen occurred
at 20 ◦ C and a further increase in the temperature did not increase the denitrification rate. The literature
presents little data on the influence of low temperature on denitrifying microorganisms. It is commonly
accepted that the efficiency of denitrification below 10 ◦ C or above 30 ◦ C decreased significantly.
However, the reduction of oxidized forms of nitrogen was noted from 1 ◦ C to 8 ◦ C [20,22]. There are
no reports on the efficiency of nitrification or denitrification at 0 ◦ C.
The issue of wastewater treatment containing de-icing agents still remains unresolved. Most of
airports in the world are not equipped with wastewater treatment systems. Urea, acetate and sodium
formate in solid form and acetate and potassium formate in a liquid form are common chemicals used
for the winter maintenance of airport pavements.
The novelty of our work results from thermal conditions, specific wastewater and new biofilter
filling. The study was carried out at very low temperatures −0.4 and 8 ◦ C. The subject of research was
wastewater generated during the de-icing of airport pavements. Wastewater contains urea and de-icing
agents with readily biodegradable organic compounds. Wastewater characterized by a different C/N
ratio was treated in biofilm reactors with light weight aggregates prepared from fly ash from sewage
sludge thermal treatment (FASST LWA). We expect that the study has proven that the denitrification and
nitrification processes may take place even at 0 ◦ C, due to the specificity of LECA filled bioreactors and
maintaining the appropriate ratio between nitrogen and carbon compounds in the treated wastewater.
Water 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 17
Water 2019, 11, 630 3 of 17

responsible for environmental protection at airports and provide a technological solution to treat
wastewater
We hope thatcontaining
the resultsde-icing agentswill
of our studies from airport
help pavements
engineers and for
responsible reduce the pollution
environmental of the
protection
water and ground environment.
at airports and provide a technological solution to treat wastewater containing de-icing agents from
Thepavements
airport main purpose of the study
and reduce was to determine
the pollution of the water theand
effectiveness of removing pollutants from
ground environment.
wastewater containing agents for de-icing airport pavements in
The main purpose of the study was to determine the effectiveness of removing biofilters. The biofilter filling from
pollutants was
made of LECA prepared from fly ash from sewage sludge thermal treatment
wastewater containing agents for de-icing airport pavements in biofilters. The biofilter filling was(FASST LWA), which
is characterized
made by a higher
of LECA prepared fromspecific density
fly ash from and sludge
sewage compressive
thermalstrength
treatment than natural
(FASST LECA.
LWA), Theis
which
specific goals of the study were to determine the effectiveness of nitrification
characterized by a higher specific density and compressive strength than natural LECA. The specific and denitrification
processes
goals of theand carbon
study and
were tonitrogen
determine removal in biofiltersofdepending
the effectiveness nitrification onand
temperatures. Theprocesses
denitrification scope of
the study also included determination of the influence of the C/N ratio
and carbon and nitrogen removal in biofilters depending on temperatures. The scope of the study in the wastewater on
nitrification, denitrification and removal of organic compounds (COD).
also included determination of the influence of the C/N ratio in the wastewater on nitrification, Another goal was to
determine the effect
denitrification of temperature
and removal of organic and C/N ratio on
compounds CODAnother
(COD). concentration
goal wasin treated wastewater.
to determine In
the effect
the conducted study, wastewater containing pavement de-icing agents
of temperature and C/N ratio on COD concentration in treated wastewater. In the conducted study, (urea and readily
biodegradable organic pavement
wastewater containing compounds) was treated,
de-icing agents (ureaassuming that maintaining
and readily biodegradable a proper
organicrelationship
compounds)
between the amount of carbon and nitrogen in the treated wastewater
was treated, assuming that maintaining a proper relationship between the amount of carbon can ensure effective removal
and
of pollutants in low temperatures.
nitrogen in the treated wastewater can ensure effective removal of pollutants in low temperatures.

2.
2. Materials
Materials and
and Methods
Methods

2.1.
2.1. Experimental
Experimental Stand
Stand and
and Organization
Organization
The
The study
study was
was performed
performed in in2424circular
circularreactors
reactorsthat
thatare
arelaboratory
laboratorymodels
modelsof ofbiofilters
biofilterswith
withthe
the
filling
filling in the form of LECA (Figure
(Figure 1).
1). A
A bioreactor
bioreactor consisted
consistedofofaacylindrical
cylindricalpolyethylene
polyethylenepipe
pipeand
anda
acone-shaped
cone-shapedbottom.
bottom. InIn
thethe bottom
bottom of of
thethe reactor,
reactor, which
which waswas
the the outflow
outflow part,part, a drain
a drain valvevalve was
was used
used to collect
to collect samplessamples of the wastewater.
of the treated treated wastewater. The technical
The technical parameters parameters of the
of the reactor reactor
were: were:
surface area
95 cm2 , area
surface 95 cm
volume 2500 cm3 and
2, volume 2500 cm3volume
active and active cm3 . 1552 cm3.
1552volume

Figure
Figure 1. Biofilter
1. Biofilter with
with LECA
LECA (Light
(Light ExpandedClay
Expanded Clay Aggregates)
Aggregates)filling.
filling.

The filling of the reactors was granulate. It had a structure of extended-clay aggregate (with
The filling of the reactors was granulate. It had a structure of extended-clay aggregate (with a
a diameter d60 = 8.2 mm) prepared from fly ash from sewage sludge thermal treatment in the
diameter d60 = 8.2 mm) prepared from fly ash from sewage sludge thermal treatment in the
“D˛ebogórze” Wastewater Treatment Plant in Gdynia (Poland). The granulate was prepared using
“Dębogórze” Wastewater Treatment Plant in Gdynia (Poland). The granulate was prepared using
mechanical plasticization and fragmentation of the raw material, followed by firing small balls (average
mechanical plasticization and fragmentation of the raw material, followed by firing small balls
diameter d60 of 8.2 mm) into a rotary kiln at 1200 ◦ C [23]. The study was divided into three series
Water 2019,
Water 2019,11,
11,630
x FOR PEER REVIEW 44 of 17
of 17

(average diameter d60 of 8.2 mm) into a rotary kiln at 1200 °C [23]. The study was divided into three
differing in organic
series differing carbon carbon
in organic dose introduced to the reactor.
dose introduced In each series,
to the reactor. In eachfour variants
series, with reactors
four variants with
operated at different wastewater temperatures were separated using a thermostatic chamber
reactors operated at different wastewater temperatures were separated using a thermostatic (POL-EKO
APARATURA
chamber (POL-EKO ST 350/350, EU—Poland)
APARATURA (FigureEU—Poland)
ST 350/350, 2). (Figure 2).

Figure 2. Research scheme.

2.2.
2.2. Characteristics
Characteristics of
of Wastewater
Wastewater Fed
Fed to
to Reactors
Reactors
The
The synthetic
synthetic wastewater, prepared from
wastewater, prepared from sample
sample weight
weight (using
(using Sartorius
Sartorius CPA225D-0CE,
CPA225D-0CE,
Germany), which included commonly used agents for de-icing airport
Germany), which included commonly used agents for de-icing airport pavements and pavements and tap
tap water,
water,
was
was the
the substrate
substrate for
for the
the experiment
experiment (Supplementary
(SupplementaryTableTableS1).
S1).
The
The experiments were carried out at the same hydraulic retention
experiments were carried out at the same hydraulic retention time.
time. The
The concentration
concentration ofof
organic compounds in the wastewater was increased to obtain higher organic
organic compounds in the wastewater was increased to obtain higher organic loading in theloading in the following
biofilters.
following The indicators
biofilters. of raw wastewater
The indicators are presented
of raw wastewater are in Table 1. in Table 1.
presented

Table 1. Average
Table 1. ±SD) values
Average((±SD) values of
of raw
raw wastewater
wastewater concentration
concentration in
in subsequent
subsequent research
research series.
series.
Parameter
Parameter Series 1 1
Series Series
Series 22 Series
Series 3 3
C/NC/N (gC/gN)
(gC/gN) 0.50.5 2.5
2.5 5.05.0
N tot (mg N/dm
Ntot (mg N/dm ) 3
3) 71.56 ± 2.20
71.56 ± 2.20
NKjeldahl
NKjeldahl (mg/dm
(mg/dm 3 ) 3) 70.80
70.80 ±±3.02
3.02
TOC (mg
TOC (mg C/dm ) C/dm
3 3) 56.96 ±
56.96 ± 1.981.98 200.80 ±± 4.79
200.80 4.79 375.71 ± 6.97
375.71 ± 6.97
COD (mg
COD (mg O2 /dm ) O 2/dm
3 3) 100.66 ±
100.66 ± 1.341.34 386.80 ± 1.94
386.80 ± 1.94 765.50 ± 2.90
765.50 ± 2.90
Dissolved
Dissolved oxygenoxygen
(mg (mg
O2 /dm O2/dm
3 ) 3) 6.64
6.64 ±±0.71
0.71
Redox
Redox potential
potential (mV) (mV) 189.33 ±±12.23
12.23
pH pH 7.75 ±±0.28
0.28

The organic
The organic compounds
compounds loading
loading in
in the
the following
following series
series of
of experiments
experiments are
are presented
presented in
in Table
Table 2.
2.
Water 2019, 11, 630 5 of 17

Table 2. The average (±SD) reactor pollutant loading.

Parameter Series 1 Series 2 Series 3

C/N (gC/gN) 0.5 2.5 5.0
Ntot. (mg N/m2 ·d) 357.8 ± 11.00
NKjeldahl (mg N/m2 ·d) 354.00 ± 15.10
N-NH4 (mg N/m2 ·d) 0.00
COD (mg O2 /m2 ·d) 503.30 ± 7.19 1934.00 ± 9.47 3827.50 ± 14.50

The study was carried out using biofilters with vertical flow. During the first three months,
they were operated with synthetic wastewater (adaptive phase). During this period, the temperature
of the biofilters dropped 1 ◦ C/d until the assumed operating temperature was reached. The study
was performed at a low hydraulic loading of 5 dm3 /m2 ·d, which facilitated nitrification [22] and a
hydraulic retention time of 4 d, which corresponded to the dosing frequency of de-icing agents at
airports of 4 d. The adaptive phase lasted until stabilization of composition of the treated wastewater.
After adaptive period, each of biofilters was operated at the temperature of 25, 8, 4 or 0 ◦ C. The reactor
operated at the temperature of 25 ◦ C was the control reactor. Biofilters were placed in a thermostatic
chamber which maintained the temperature with an accuracy of ± 0.1 ◦ C.
The wastewater was dispensed to biofilters once every four days in a way that ensured an even
distribution of the wastewater on the surface of the filling.

2.3. Analytical Procedures

Physicochemical analyses of raw and treated wastewater included: nitrate concentration
(spectrophotometric method) [24], nitrite concentration (spectrophotometric method) [25], ammonium
nitrogen concentration (spectrophotometric method) [26] using VWR UV-3100PC Spectrophotometer
(China) Kjeldahl total nitrogen (titrimetric method) [27] using a Buchi SpeedDigester K-436
(Switzerland) and Buchi KjelFlex K-360 (Switzerland), organic compound concentration (COD)
(titrimetric method) [28] using a Gerhardt KI 16 (Germany) laboratory heater, concentration of total
nitrogen (TN) and total organic carbon (TOC) with a Shimadzu Corporation TOC-L CPN and TNM-L
analyzer (Japan), dissolved oxygen, pH, redox potential and temperature with a HACH HQ440d
multi-analyzer (USA.).
The results were calculated on the basis of approx. 30 measurements of pollution indicators in the
raw and treated wastewater.

2.4. Statistical Analysis

To determine any statistically significant differences between variants, a one-way analysis of
variance was carried out. Significant differences in the mean values of the measured parameters were
estimated using the ANOVA analysis, with a post-hoc reasonable significant difference (RIR) Tukey
test. If the assumptions of the ANOVA analysis were not met, a non-parametric Kruskal–Wallis test
was used as well as the post-hoc test of multiple comparison test (Dunn’s test). The significance level
of α = 0.05 was used. The statistical analyses were performed in the Statistica 13.1 PL package. Details
of the statistical analysis are presented in Supplementary Tables S2–S10.

3. Results and Discussion

The study tested oxidation reduction potential, pH and concentration of dissolved oxygen in raw
and treated wastewater (Tables 1 and 3).
 Water 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 17

Table 3. Physicochemical properties of treated wastewater.

Water 2019, 11, 630 6 of 17
C/N [gC/gN] Temperature [°C] pH Oxidation-Reduction Potential [mV]
0 °C 8.37–8.55 127.30 ± 4.84
Table 3. 4Physicochemical
°C properties of treated wastewater.
8.42–8.62 118.50 ± 3.00
0.5
C/N [gC/gN] 8 °C [◦ C]
Temperature 8.36–8.66
pH 114.80 ± 3.04Potential [mV]
Oxidation-Reduction
25 °C 8.61–8.79 104.90 ± 3.22
0 ◦C 8.37–8.55 127.30 ± 4.84
4 0◦ C°C 8.32–8.50
8.42–8.62 117.20 ± 3.88
118.50 ± 3.00
0.5
8 4◦ C°C 8.39–8.61
8.36–8.66 112.08 ± 4.21
114.80 ± 3.04
2.5
258◦°C C 8.61–8.79
8.41–8.65 104.90
105.65 ± 3.22
± 3.07
◦
025C°C 8.40–8.72
8.32–8.50 93.74 ± 1.94
117.20 ± 3.88
4 0◦ C°C 8.39–8.61
8.41–8.67 112.08
107.80 ± 4.21
± 3.21
2.5
8 4◦ C°C 8.41–8.65
8.46–8.72 105.65 ± 3.07
96.03 ± 2.87
5.0 25 ◦ C 8.40–8.72 93.74 ± 1.94
8 °C 8.48–8.76 92.28 ± 2.24
025◦C 8.41–8.67 107.80 ± 3.21
◦ °C 8.62–8.78 86.38 ± 3.31
4 C 8.46–8.72 96.03 ± 2.87
5.0
8 ◦C 8.48–8.76 92.28 ± 2.24
The concentration of 25
dissolved
◦C oxygen in the treated wastewater
8.62–8.78 86.38 ± was
3.31 0.00 mg O2/dm
3

independent of the series of the experiment. The redox potential in the treated wastewater was
lower than in the raw wastewater (Table 1). In all series of experiments, a low temperature of reactor
The concentration of dissolved oxygen in the treated wastewater was 0.00 mg O2 /dm3
operation increased redox potential in the treated wastewater in the same technological conditions.
independent of the series of the experiment. The redox potential in the treated wastewater was
In all series of experiments, the pH of wastewater increased during the treatment process. At low
lower than in the raw wastewater (Table 1). In all series of experiments, a low temperature of reactor
temperatures, the pH values in the treated wastewater were lower than at higher temperatures.
operation increased redox potential in the treated wastewater in the same technological conditions.
The pH of wastewater increased during treatment in biofilters. The low temperatures of
In all series of experiments, the pH of wastewater increased during the treatment process. At low
biofilter operation decreased the values of pH in the treated wastewater.
temperatures, the pH values in the treated wastewater were lower than at higher temperatures.
Nitrogen compound transformations in the biofilm occurred as shown in the Figure 3 and
The pH of wastewater increased during treatment in biofilters. The low temperatures of biofilter
described by Equations (1)–(5). This corresponded to the removal efficiency shown in the
operation decreased the values of pH in the treated wastewater.
Supplementary Table S11. The mass balance of the overall wastewater treatment process is shown in
Nitrogen compound transformations in the biofilm occurred as shown in the Figure 3 and described
Table 4.
by Equations (1)–(5). This corresponded to the removal efficiency shown in the Supplementary Table S11.
The mass balance of the overall wastewater treatment process is shown in Table 4.

Figure 3. Transformation of nitrogen compounds in a biofilm: a—ammonification, b—immobilization,

c—first phase of nitrification, d—second phase of nitrification, e—release to atmosphere,
Figure 3. Transformation
f—denitrification, of nitrogen
g—anaerobic oxidation compounds
of ammonium in [29].
nitrogen a biofilm: a—ammonification,
b—immobilization, c—first phase of nitrification, d—second phase of nitrification, e—release to
atmosphere, f—denitrification, g—anaerobic oxidation of ammonium nitrogen [29].

Mass balance in nitrogen compound transformations in the biofilm:

Nitrification (including biomass production—C5H7O2N)
-I stage:
Water 2019, 11, 630 7 of 17

Mass balance in nitrogen compound transformations in the biofilm:

Nitrification (including biomass production—C5 H7 O2 N)
-I stage:

55NH4 + + 5CO2 + 76O2 → C5 H7 O2 N + 54NO2 − + 52H2 O + 109H+ (1)

-II stage:

400NO2 − + 5CO2 + NH4 + + 195O2 + 2H2 O → C5 H7 O2 N + 400NO3 − + H+ (2)

summary:

NH4 + + 1.86O2 + 0.10CO2 → 0.021C5 H7 O2 N + 0.941H2 O + 0.98NO3 − + 1.98H+ (3)

Denitrification (including biomass production -C5 H7 O2 N and acetate as carbon source)

CH3 COO− + 1.01 NO3 − + 1.01 H+ → 0.13 C5 H7 O2 N + 0.36 CO2 + HCO3 − + 1.06 H2 O + 0.44N2 (4)

Anaerobic oxidation of ammonium nitrogen (including biomass production -CH2 O0.5 N0.15 )

NH4 ++ 1.32 NO2 − +0.066 HCO3 − +0.13 H+ →1.02 N2 +0.26 NO3 − +0.066 CH2 O0.5 N0.15 +2.03 H2 O (5)

Table 4. Mass balance of the overall wastewater treatment process.

Influent Effluent
Temperature COD Total Nitrogen COD Total Nitrogen
C/N [gC/gN]
[◦ C] [mgO2 /m2 ·d] [mgN/m2 ·d] [mgO2 /m2 ·d] [mgN/m2 ·d]
0 187.98 ± 30.50 234.11 ± 16.24
4 164.83 ± 26.12 231.10 ± 12.20
0.5 503.30 ± 6.70
8 115.76 ± 13.04 216.86 ± 16.82
25 102.17 ± 8.56 194.18 ± 10.16
0 1523.80 ± 38.10 269.85 ± 8.27
4 357.80 ± 11.00 1467.52 ± 38.87 231.64 ± 10.41
2.5 1934.00 ± 9.70
8 1445.08 ± 21.27 228.96 ± 10.52
25 866.63 ± 152.59 170.74 ± 12.56
0 3109.84 ± 100.66 274.75 ± 9.48
4 3018.37 ± 101.43 256.26 ± 11.34
5.0 3827.50 ± 14.50
8 2981.62± 65.07 245.31 ± 16.78
25 1446.08 ± 203.24 165.73 ± 13.99

3.1. Nitrification Efficiency

The experiments determined the influence of temperature on the efficiency of ammonium nitrogen
oxidation and the relationship between temperature and the efficiency of nitrification under different
concentrations of organic carbon compounds in wastewater fed to biofilters.
In the first series, the organic carbon to nitrogen ratio was 0.5 gC/gN and the efficiency of
nitrification was 47.68 ± 2.26% in the control reactor (operated at the temperature of 25 ◦ C). The low
temperatures of biofilter operation significantly (p < 0.05) decreased the efficiency of the process
compared with the control reactor while maintaining the same technological conditions (Figure 4a).
In the biofilter operated at 0 ◦ C, the nitrification efficiency was 36.88 ± 6.29%.
 Water 2019, 11, 630 8 of 17
Water 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 17

Figure 4.Figure
Influence of temperature
4. Influence on the
of temperature nitrification
on the nitrification efficiency
efficiency in:in:
(a)(a) series
series 1 (C/N
1 (C/N = 0.5= gC/gN),
0.5 gC/gN), (b)
(b) series 2 (C/N = 2.5 gC/gN), (c) series 3 (C/N
series 2 (C/N = 2.5 gC/gN), (c) series 3 (C/N = 5.0 gC/gN). = 5.0 gC/gN).

A multiple comparison test showed that in the biofilters operated at low temperatures,
A multiple comparison
the efficiencies of oxidationtestofshowed
ammonium that in thewere
nitrogen biofilters
similar operated
and did notatsignificantly
low temperatures,
differ the
efficiencies of oxidation
(p < 0.05). of ammonium
In the reactors ◦
operated at 4nitrogen
C and 8 C ◦ were similar and
the percentage did not significantly
of ammonium nitrogen that was differ (p <
oxidized was 39.98 ± 3.31% and 41.70 ± 4.02%, respectively.
0.05). In the reactors operated at 4 °C and 8 °C the percentage of ammonium nitrogen that was
oxidized wasThe changing of the technological parameters of reactor operations in the second series,
39.98 ± 3.31% and 41.70 ± 4.02%, respectively.
by increasing the amount of organic carbon in the influent to 2.5 gC/gN, did not significantly change
Thethe
changing of the technological parameters of reactor operations in the second series, by
efficiency of nitrification in the control reactor, in which it was 50.08 ± 2.86%. The efficiency of
increasing the amount
oxidation of organic
of ammonium carbon
nitrogen in theinother
the reactors
influentwas to significantly
2.5 gC/gN,lower did not
thansignificantly
in the control change
the efficiency
reactor.ofInnitrification in the control
this series of experiments, the reactor,
efficiencyin of which it was
nitrification was50.08
from ± 2.86%.
24.88 Theinefficiency
± 1.99% the of
reactor ◦
operated at 0 nitrogen ± 3.72%
C to 34.81 in in the reactors
reactor operated ◦
at 8 C (Figure lower
4b).
oxidation of ammonium the other was significantly than in the control
The changing of the technological parameters of reactor operation in the third series, by increasing
reactor. In this series of experiments, the efficiency of nitrification was from 24.88 ± 1.99% in the
the amount of organic carbon in the influent to 5.0 gC/gN, caused that in the reactor operated at the
reactor operated at 0 °C to 34.81 ± 3.72% in the reactor operated at 8 °C (Figure 4b).
temperature of 25 ◦ C, the efficiency of nitrification was 50.93 ± 4.35%. However, this efficiency was
Thenot
changing
significantlyofhigher
the technological parameters
than in the other series. of series,
In the third reactor operation
the low in the
temperatures third
of the series, by
biofilter
increasing the amount
operation of organic
significantly decreased carbon in the influent
the nitrification efficiency.to The
5.0 lowest
gC/gN, causedofthat
efficiency in the reactor
nitrification
± 5.15%) ◦
operated(24.65
at the was noted
temperature of in25the
°C,biofilter operated of
the efficiency at nitrification
0 C. The efficiency of ammonium
was 50.93 ± 4.35%.nitrogen
However, this
oxidation was 27.46 ± 5.58% in the reactor operated at 4 ◦ C and 30.49 ± 7.83% in the reactor operated
efficiency was not significantly higher than in the other series. In the third series, the low
at 8 ◦ C (Figure 4c).
temperaturesThe ofobtained
the biofilter operation significantly decreased the nitrification efficiency. The lowest
results and the literature data indicate that the efficiency of nitrification depends
efficiency
onofthenitrification
temperature (24.65 ± 5.15%)
conditions. Manywas noted
authors haveinalso
theidentified
biofiltertemperature
operated atas0the °C.main
Thefactor
efficiency of
ammonium nitrogen
determining theoxidation
metabolism was 27.46 ± 5.58%
of nitrifying in which
bacteria, the reactor operated
inhibited at 4[11].
nitrification °C and 30.49
In this ± 7.83% in
study,
the operation of a biofilter at 0 ◦ C significantly (p < 0.05) decreased the nitrification efficiency compared
the reactor operated at 8 °C (Figure 4c).
Thewith the control reactor in each series. These results confirmed the study carried out by Zhang et al. [30]
obtained results and the literature data indicate that the efficiency of nitrification depends
which showed a rapid decrease in the nitrification efficiency to 12.7% at the temperature of 2.5 ◦ C and
on the temperature conditions. Many authors have also identified temperature as the main factor
a study carried out by Hoang et al. [31] which showed the nitrification activity of microorganisms at
determining the metabolism
a temperature below 1 ◦ C.ofInnitrifying
the present bacteria, which inhibited
study, the influence nitrification
of the temperature on the[11]. In this study,
nitrification
the operation of a biofilter at 0 °C significantly (p < 0.05) decreased the nitrification efficiency
compared with the control reactor in each series. These results confirmed the study carried out by
Zhang et al. [30] which showed a rapid decrease in the nitrification efficiency to 12.7% at the
temperature of 2.5 °C and a study carried out by Hoang et al. [31] which showed the nitrification
activity of microorganisms at a temperature below 1 °C. In the present study, the influence of the
Water 2019, 11, 630 9 of 17

efficiency was the highest in the third series, in which the wastewater was characterized by the C/N
ratio of 5.0 gC/gN. In this series, dropping the temperature of the reactor operation from 25 ◦ C to 0 ◦ C
decreased the efficiency of ammonium nitrogen oxidation by more than 26%. The highest efficiency
of nitrification of 36.88 ± 6.29% in the biofilter operated at the temperature of 0 ◦ C was noted in the
series in which the wastewater was characterized by the lowest organic compound concentration.
Young et al. [14] showed that as nitrification efficiency decreased due to the decreased temperature,
the accumulation of nitrate nitrogen (III) occurred in the treated wastewater. In the present study,
the accumulation of nitrate nitrogen (III) associated with a decrease in the nitrification efficiency
was not observed despite the decrease in ammonia nitrogen oxidation efficiency. These results are
consistent with recent literature reports, which showed that ammonium oxidizing bacteria are just as
sensitive [32] to a temperature drop below 20 ◦ C as nitrite oxidizing bacteria, or even more so.
Many authors have noted the dependency of the nitrification efficiency on the concentration
of immobilized biomass in the biofilter. It is commonly accepted that a drop in the temperature of
10 ◦ C will result in a 50% decrease in microorganism activity [33]. However, numerous authors have
also noted that an immobilized biomass is less sensitive to the temperature drop than suspended
biomass due to limited effect of diffusion on mass transfer processes [16]. Rostron et al. [17] showed
that dropping the temperature from 25 ◦ C to 16 ◦ C decreased the nitrification efficiency by 10% in the
biofilter with immobilized biomass, while a 58% decrease in nitrification efficiency was observed in
a reactor with suspended biomass. The insufficient alkalinity of wastewater results in a decrease in
pH, which inhibits the nitrifying microorganisms, mainly bacteria, of the second phase of nitrification
since they are more sensitive to changes in pH [34]. A literature review showed that the expanded-clay
aggregate used in the BAF (Biological Aerated Filter) system “buffered” changes in pH and redox
potential [18], which is consistent with the results obtained in the present study, and the pH in all
experiments was maintained at a constant level of 8.41–8.70. This level facilitated nitrification [19].
Young et al. [14] observed that the unfavorable effect of high C/N ratio in the wastewater on
the ammonium nitrogen removal increased at the low temperatures. The current study showed
that the nitrification efficiency in the series of the study was not directly related to the C/N ratio in
the wastewater. Therefore, the high nitrification efficiency observed with high organic compound
concentrations in the wastewater resulted from heterotrophic nitrification. Guo et al. [35] observed
that many heterotrophic microorganisms (not only bacteria, but also fungi and plants) were capable of
nitrifying organic and inorganic nitrogen compounds. These microorganisms grew faster, required
less oxygen and tolerated a higher C/N ratio in the wastewater than autotrophic nitrifying bacteria.

3.2. Denitrification Efficiency

Although the concentration of oxidized ammonium nitrogen indicates the efficiency of
nitrification, the difference between the concentration of oxidized ammonium nitrogen and the
concentration of nitrites and nitrates in the treated wastewater is the amount of nitrogen removed
during denitrification. The study results suggest simultaneous nitrification and denitrification in
the biofilm.
In the first series, in which the wastewater was characterized by an organic carbon-to-nitrogen
ratio of 0.5 gC/gN, the efficiency of denitrification was 89.83 ± 0.96% in the biofilter operated at
25 ◦ C. The low temperatures of the biofilter operation resulted in decreased and slightly increased
denitrification efficiency. However, a statistical analysis showed that only in the biofilter operated at
4 ◦ C was the process efficiency significantly different (p < 0.05) than in the control biofilter. In this
reactor, the efficiency of denitrification was 84.69 ± 2.72% (Figure 5a).
Water 2019, 11, 630 10 of 17
Water 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 17

102
94

100
92

98

Denitrification efficiency [%]

90
Denitrification efficiency [%]

88 96

86 94

84 92

82
90

80
0 4 8 25 88
0 4 8 25
Temperature [°C]
Temperature [°C]

(a) (b)
102

100

98
Denitrification efficiency [%]

96

94

92

90

88

86

84
average
82 average±SE
0 4 8 25
average±SD
Temperature [°C]

(c)
Figure 5.
Figure 5. Influence
Influence ofof temperature
temperatureon
onthe
thedenitrification
denitrificationefficiency
efficiencyin:
in:(a)
(a)series
series11(C/N
(C/N == 0.5
0.5 gC/gN),
gC/gN),
(b) series
(b) series 22 (C/N
(C/N == 2.5
2.5 gC/gN),
gC/gN),(c)
(c)series
series33(C/N
(C/N= =5.05.0
gC/gN).
gC/gN).

Decreasing
Decreasing the temperature to 0 ◦°C
the temperature C in the biofilter did not significantly change the efficiency of
denitrification (p < 0.05). In this biofilter,−
denitrification (p < 0.05). In this biofilter, 89.88 ±
−89.88 ±2.72%
2.72%of of oxidized
oxidized nitrogen
nitrogen was was reduced, while in
the ◦ C− 90.32 ±±2.77%
the biofilter
biofilter operated
operated at at 88 °C −90.32 2.77%ofofoxidized
oxidizednitrogen
nitrogenwas wasreduced.
reduced.
The
The change in in the
the technological
technologicalparameters
parametersofofthe thereactor
reactor operation
operation in inthethe second
second series,
series, by
by increasing the amount of organic carbon in the influent to 2.5
increasing the amount of organic carbon in the influent to 2.5 gC/gN significantly increased the gC/gN significantly increased
the denitrification
denitrification efficiency
efficiency to to 98.24
98.24 ± 1.56%
± 1.56% (p (p < 0.05)
< 0.05) comparedwith
compared withthe thefirst
firstseries.
series. AA significantly
significantly
lower concentration of reduced nitrogen compared with the control
lower concentration of reduced nitrogen compared with the control reactor was only observed reactor was only observed in the
in
biofilter operated ◦
at 0 atC,0 in ± 2.62%
the biofilter operated °C,which the efficiency
in which of denitrification
the efficiency of denitrification was was
92.3692.36 (Figure
± 2.62% 5b).5b).
(Figure
The
The efficiency
efficiency of of the
the reduction
reduction of of oxidized
oxidized nitrogen forms in the other reactors ranged from
97.29 ± 1.14% at 4 ◦ C to 98.60 ± 0.76% at 8 ◦ C.
97.29 ± 1.14% at 4 °C to 98.60 ± 0.76% at 8 °C.
The
The changing
changingofof thethe
technological
technological parameters of reactor
parameters operation
of reactor in the third
operation series,
in the thirdby increasing
series, by
the amountthe
increasing of organic
amountcarbon of organicin the influent
carbon to 5.0
in the gC/gN,
influent to resulted
5.0 gC/gN, in the denitrification
resulted efficiency of
in the denitrification
99.23 ± 0.42%
efficiency in the
of 99.23 control
± 0.42% inreactor, although
the control this
reactor, efficiency
although thiswas not significantly
efficiency higher thanhigher
was not significantly in the
second
than in series (p < 0.05).
the second series (p < 0.05).
In
In the
the third
third series,
series, thethe lowlow temperatures
temperatures of the the reactors
reactors operation
operation significantly decreased the
efficiency
efficiency of denitrification compared with with the
the control
controlreactor
reactor(p (p<<0.05).
0.05).InInthe
thebiofilter
biofilteroperated
operatedatat 0
◦ C, the denitrification efficiency was 87.59 ± 4.60%. A multiple comparison test showed
0°C, the denitrification efficiency was 87.59 ± 4.60%. A multiple comparison test showed that the
denitrification
denitrification efficiency
efficiencywas wassignificantly
significantlyhigher
higherthanthanin inthe
thebiofilter
biofilteroperated
operatedat at00◦°C (96.64±
C (96.64 2.36%
± 2.36%
◦ ◦
and 97.02 ±
and 97.02 2.50%) than
± 2.50%) than inin the
the biofilters
biofilters operated
operated at at 44 °CC and
and 88 °C, C, respectively
respectively (Figure
(Figure 5c).
5c).
It
It is assumed
assumed that thatthetheactivity
activityofofthetheheterotrophic
heterotrophic denitrifying
denitrifying bacteria
bacteria is less
is less dependent
dependent on
on the
the temperature ◦
temperature thanthan nitrifying
nitrifying bacteria.
bacteria. Denitrification
Denitrification was was observed
observed at temperatures
at temperatures fromfrom1 °C 1to 5C°C
to
◦ C [36]. In the present study, the highest denitrification efficiency of 99.23 ± 0.42% was observed in
5[36]. In the present study, the highest denitrification efficiency of 99.23 ± 0.42% was observed in the
the control
control reactor
reactor in the
in the thirdthird series
series (C/N (C/N
= 5.0=gC/gN).
5.0 gC/gN).In this In series,
this series, the denitrification
the denitrification efficiency
efficiency was
significantly reduced (p < 0.05) in the biofilters operated at low temperatures. In the other series, a
 Water 2019, 11, 630 11 of 17

Water 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 17

was significantly reduced (p < 0.05) in the biofilters operated at low temperatures. In the other
significant
series,relationship
a significantbetween the efficiency
relationship between the of efficiency
denitrification and the temperature
of denitrification was not was
and the temperature
observed. Therefore,Therefore,
not observed. if the temperature was not was
if the temperature the main
not thefactor
maindetermining
factor determiningthe denitrification
the denitrification
efficiency, the formation of anoxic zones as a result of oxygen depletion
efficiency, the formation of anoxic zones as a result of oxygen depletion in the biofilm in the biofilm was decisive.
was decisive.
At higher temperatures,
At higher temperatures, oxygen
oxygenconsumption
consumption waswas faster in in
faster thetheouter,
outer,more
more active layers of
active layers ofthe
thebiofilm,
biofilm,which resulted in the formation of anoxic zones and a greater share of denitrification in thethe
which resulted in the formation of anoxic zones and a greater share of denitrification in removal
removal of nitrogen
of nitrogen from from wastewater.
wastewater. The The dependency
dependency of theofformation
the formation of anoxic
of anoxic zoneszones
on theon the
temperature
temperature was confirmed
was confirmed by Liu by Liu
et al. et al.
[37]. The[37]. The authors
authors observed observed
that at lowthattemperatures,
at low temperatures, the
the penetration of
penetration of oxygen into the biofilm was higher. In the present study, the porous
oxygen into the biofilm was higher. In the present study, the porous structure of the filling could structure of the
filling contribute
could contribute to the formation
to the formation of specific
of specific oxygen-anaerobic
oxygen-anaerobic conditions conditions
that werethat were favorable
favorable to simultaneous
to simultaneous nitrification and denitrification [38]. Microscopic analysis
nitrification and denitrification [38]. Microscopic analysis of extended-clay aggregates showed the of extended-clay
aggregates showed the
immobilization immobilization both
of microorganisms, of microorganisms,
on their surface and both on their
in their surface intensified
micropores, and in their biological
micropores, intensified
wastewater biological
treatment wastewater
processes. On thetreatment
other hand, processes. On the other
in the biofilm operated hand,
within the biofilm
a high content of
operated withcompounds
organic a high content of organic compounds
in the wastewater, the high number in the wastewater,produced
of heterotrophs the higha number of
greater amount of
heterotrophs produced a greater amount of exopolymers, which could increase
exopolymers, which could increase the thickness and density of the biofilm. A higher density biomass the thickness and
density(andof the
lower biofilm. A higher
porosity) density
may limit biomass
effective oxygen(anddiffusion,
lower porosity)
even in themaycase limit
of effective oxygen
a thin biofilm [39].
diffusion, even in the case of a thin biofilm [39].
3.3. Efficiency of Nitrogen Compounds Removal
3.3. Efficiency of Nitrogen Compounds Removal
In the biofilters, the nitrogen compounds were removed as a result of biomass growth and
Inreduction
the biofilters, the nitrogen
of oxidized nitrogencompounds
to nitrogen were
oxidesremoved
and nitrogenas a result
gas. of biomass growth and
reduction ofAoxidized
statisticalnitrogen to nitrogen
study showed oxides andinfluence
the significant nitrogenof gas.
the temperature of the biofilter operation
Aand
statistical
the C/N study
ratioshowed the significant
in the wastewater influence
on the of the
efficiency of temperature
nitrogen removal of thefrom
biofilter operation
wastewater (p < 0.05)
and the C/N ratio in the◦ wastewater on the efficiency of nitrogen removal from
(Figure 6). At 25 C, the lowest efficiency of nitrogen removal of 45.73 ± 2.85% was noted at the C/N wastewater (p < 0.05)
(Figureratio
6). Atof 25
0.5°C, the lowest
gC/gN. efficiency
Significantly of nitrogen
higher removal
efficiency of 45.73
of nitrogen ± 2.85%
removal ofwas
52.28noted at the
± 3.51% wasC/N noted at
ratio ofthe
0.5C/N
gC/gN. Significantly higher efficiency of nitrogen removal of
= 2.5 gC/gN and 53.68 ± 3.91% at the C/N = 5.0 gC/gN than in the first series. 52.28 ± 3.51% was noted at
the C/N = 2.5 gC/gN and 53.68 ± 3.91% at the C/N = 5.0 gC/gN than in the first series.
60

55
Efficiency of nitrogen compounds removal [%]

50

45

40

35

30

25 Series 1:
C/N=0.5 [gC/gN]
20 Series 2:
C/N=2.5 [gC/gN]
15 Series 3:
0 4 8 25
C/N=5.0 [gC/gN]
Temperature [°C]

Figure 6. Temperature influence on the efficiency of nitrogen compound removal, depending on the
C/N ratio.
Figure 6. Temperature influence on the efficiency of nitrogen compound removal, depending on the
Since the efficiency of nitrogen removal from the wastewater at the C/N = 0.5 gC/gN was the
C/N ratio.
most resistant to the low temperatures, in this series the significantly highest efficiency of nitrogen
Since the efficiency
removal of nitrogen
from wastewater removal
of 34.57 from the
± 4.54% waswastewater ◦ C C/N
observed atat0the (p < =0.05).
0.5 gC/gN was the study
The statistical
most resistant
showed to the low temperatures,
a significant in efficiency
decrease in the this seriesof
the significantly
nitrogen highest
removal with efficiency
an increaseofinnitrogen
the C/N ratio
removal from wastewater of 34.57 ± 4.54% was observed at 0 °C (p < 0.05). The statistical study
showed a significant decrease in the efficiency of nitrogen removal with an increase in the C/N ratio
Water 2019, 11, 630 12 of 17

at the low temperature of biofilter operation. However, in the control reactors, the reverse tendency
was observed.
In the first series, a multiple comparison test showed that in the reactors which were operated
at low temperatures, the reduction of the nitrogen compounds was similar and did not significantly
differ. The statistical study also did not show significant differences in the share of biomass growth
and denitrification observed at low temperatures of the biofilter operation (p < 0.05). Only at 25 ◦ C
was the share of biomass growth in the removal of nitrogen compounds significantly increased to
6.36 ± 0.99%, which corresponded to a concentration of 2.08 ± 0.34 mg N/dm3 . Figure 7a presents the
concentration of removed nitrogen (determined as the concentration of removed nitrogen compounds)
resulting from biomass growth and denitrification in the first series.

Figure 7. Concentration of removed nitrogen as a result of biomass synthesis and denitrification processes
in: (a) series 1 (C/N = 0.5 gC/gN), (b) series 2 (C/N = 2.5 gC/gN), (c) series 3 (C/N = 5.0 gC/gN).

A multiple comparison test showed that in the reactors operated at low temperatures, the share
of biomass synthesis and denitrification in nitrogen compound removal was similar and did not
significantly differ in the second series (p < 0.05). Under these conditions, denitrification predominated
in nitrogen compound removal, whereas only 4.68 ± 0.19 −6.54 ± 1.12% of nitrogen was removed
(due to the biomass growth). The significantly highest share of biomass growth in the nitrogen
compound removal in this series was observed only in the control reactor, in which 5.80 ± 0.30% of
the removed nitrogen (i.e., 2.17 ± 0.32 mg N/dm3 ) was used for biomass synthesis. The concentration
of nitrogen compound removal resulting from biomass growth and denitrification in the second series
is presented in Figure 7b.
A multiple comparison test showed that in the third series, independent of the variant of
the experiment, denitrification predominated in the removal of nitrogen compounds (Figure 7c).
The share of biomass growth and denitrification was similar and did not significantly differ at the
temperatures of 0 ◦ C, 4 ◦ C and 8 ◦ C (p < 0.05). The biomass synthesis resulted in the removal
of 5.91 ± 0.15 −6.98 ± 1.56% of nitrogen from the wastewater. In the control reactor, the biomass
synthesis removed 5.57 ± 0.21% of nitrogen, which corresponded to concentration of nitrogen removed
Water
Water 2019,
2019, 11,
11, x630
FOR PEER REVIEW 1313ofof17
17

resulted in simultaneous nitrification and denitrification. The possibility of simultaneous

of 2.24 ± 0.44
nitrification and N/dm3 . The in
mgdenitrification share
the of denitrification
biofilm has been in the removal
widely of nitrogen
documented in the compounds from
literature [40]. If
wastewater was significantly higher at 25 ◦ C than at the lower temperatures.
both nitrifying and denitrifying bacteria are present in the biofilm and the amount of oxygen is
A lowfor
sufficient temperature
the oxidationof biofilter
of organicoperation significantly
compounds decreased theyet
and nitrification, nitrogen removaltoefficiency
low enough ensure
from the wastewater (p < 0.05). In all biofilters, nitrogen was removed as
denitrification, these processes may proceed simultaneously. Puznava et al. [41] determined that a result of biomass growth
the
and a reduction of oxidized nitrogen forms. The obtained results suggest
concentration of dissolved oxygen at the level of 0.5–3.0 mg O2/dm reduced the penetration of
3 that the technological
parameters
oxygen and of biofilter operations
denitrification causedin
was possible theitsformation of anoxic
internal layers. Thezones in the
authors biofilm,anwhich
obtained resulted
efficiency of
in simultaneous nitrification and denitrification. The possibility of simultaneous
denitrification of 71% with simultaneous nitrification reaching 96–98%. However, Zinatizadeh and nitrification and
denitrification
Ghaytoolin [42]inused
the biofilm has been
a dissolved widely
oxygen documentedof
concentration in 2.5–3.0
the literature
mg O2[40].
/dm3If both nitrifying
, depending and
on the
denitrifying bacteria are present in the biofilm and the amount of oxygen is
filling of the MBBR (moving bed biofilm reactor) reactor, and observed the efficiency of nitrogen sufficient for the oxidation
of organic
removal ofcompounds
46–50% dueand nitrification, yet
to simultaneous low enough
nitrification andtodenitrification.
ensure denitrification,
Choo and these processes
Stensel may
[43] used
aproceed simultaneously.
dissolved Puznava et al.
oxygen concentration of [41]
2.8 determined
mg O2/dm3that andtheobserved
concentration
a 27% of dissolved oxygen at
process efficiency.
the level of 0.5–3.0 mg O /dm 3 reduced the penetration of oxygen and denitrification was possible
However, after a reduction 2 of the oxygen concentration below 0.6 mg O2/dm , the efficiency 3 of
in its internal layers. The authors obtained an
simultaneous nitrification and denitrification increased to 47%.efficiency of denitrification of 71% with simultaneous
nitrification reaching 96–98%. However, Zinatizadeh and Ghaytoolin [42] used a dissolved oxygen
concentration 3 , depending on the filling of the MBBR (moving bed biofilm
3.4. Efficiency ofof 2.5–3.0Compounds
Organic mg O2 /dm (COD) Removal
reactor) reactor, and observed the efficiency of nitrogen removal of 46–50% due to simultaneous
The study tested the concentration of organic compounds (COD) in the raw and treated
nitrification and denitrification. Choo and Stensel [43] used a dissolved oxygen concentration of
wastewater. The results showed that the efficiency of organic compound removal depended on the
2.8 mg O /dm3 and observed a 27% process efficiency. However, after a reduction of the oxygen
C/N ratio2in the wastewater and the temperature of the biofilter operation.
concentration below 0.6 mg O2 /dm3 , the efficiency of simultaneous nitrification and denitrification
The efficiency of organic compound removal was significantly influenced by the C/N ratio in
increased to 47%.
the wastewater (p < 0.05) (Figure 8).
3.4. Efficiency of Organic Compounds (COD) Removal
The study tested the concentration of organic compounds (COD) in the raw and treated
wastewater. The results showed that the efficiency of organic compound removal depended on
the C/N ratio in the wastewater and the temperature of the biofilter operation.
The efficiency of organic compound removal was significantly influenced by the C/N ratio in the
wastewater (p < 0.05) (Figure 8).

90
Efficiency of organic compounds (COD) removal [%]

80

70

60

50

40

30

20 Series 1:
C/N=0.5 [gC/gN]
10 Series 2:
C/N=2.5 [gC/gN]
0 Series 3:
0 4 8 25
C/N=5.0 [gC/gN]
Temperature [°C]

Figure
Figure8.
8.Efficiency
Efficiencyof
of organic
organic compound
compound removal
removal depending
depending on
on the
the C/N
C/Nratio.
ratio.

The significantlyhighest
The significantly highest efficiency
efficiency of organic
of organic compoundcompound
removal,removal, independent
independent of the
of the temperature,
temperature,
was noted in the biofilters operated at the lowest C/N ratio in the wastewater (p < 0.05). The0.05).
was noted in the biofilters operated at the lowest C/N ratio in the wastewater (p < most
The most to
resistant resistant
the lowtotemperatures
the low temperatures was the efficiency
was the efficiency of organicof organic compound
compound removal inremoval
the firstin the
series,
 Water2019,
Water 11,x 630
2019,11, FOR PEER REVIEW 14 14
of of1717

first series, i.e., at a C/N ratio of 0.5 gC/gN. For each temperature, increasing the concentration of
i.e., at a C/N ratio of 0.5 gC/gN. For each temperature, increasing the concentration of organic carbon
organic carbon decreased the efficiency of its removal.
decreased the efficiency of its removal.
A statistical analysis showed a significant effect of the C/N ratio in the wastewater on the
A statistical analysis showed a significant effect of the C/N ratio in the wastewater on the
concentration of organic compounds in the treated wastewater (Figure 9). The increased
concentration of organic compounds in the treated wastewater (Figure 9). The increased concentration
concentration of organic compounds in the raw wastewater in the following series of the study
of organic compounds in the raw wastewater in the following series of the study resulted in a
resulted in a significant deterioration of the treated wastewater quality, which resulted from a
significant deterioration of the treated wastewater quality, which resulted from a significant increase in
significant increase in the concentration of organic compounds expressed in the COD of the treated
the concentration of organic compounds expressed in the COD of the treated wastewater (p < 0.05).
wastewater (p < 0.05).
700

600

500
COD [mgO2/dm3]

400

300

200

Series 1:
100 C/N=0.5 [gC/gN]
Series 2:
C/N=2.5 [gC/gN]
0 Series 3:
0 4 8 25
C/N=5.0 [gC/gN]
Temperature [°C]

Influenceofofthe
Figure9.9.Influence
Figure theC/N
C/N ratio
ratio onon
thethe organic
organic compound
compound concentrations
concentrations inin treated
treated wastewater.
wastewater.

The concentration of organic compounds expressed in the COD in the treated wastewater showed
The concentration of organic compounds expressed in the COD in the treated wastewater
that the application of a C/N ratio above 0.5 gC/gN in the wastewater at the low temperature resulted
showed that the application of a C/N ratio above 0.5 gC/gN in the wastewater at the low
in a high concentration of organic compounds in the treated wastewater.
temperature resulted in a high concentration of organic compounds in the treated wastewater.
The present study showed an increased denitrification efficiency which was associated with
The present study showed an increased denitrification efficiency which was associated with an
an increased concentration of organic compounds in the wastewater. Even in the series with the
increased concentration of organic compounds in the wastewater. Even in the series with the lowest
lowest concentration of organic compounds in the wastewater, the denitrification efficiency was
concentration of organic compounds in the ◦wastewater, the denitrification efficiency was 89.88 ±
89.88 ± 2.72% in the biofilter operated at 0 C. The high denitrification efficiency resulted from low
2.72% in the biofilter operated at 0 °C. The high denitrification efficiency resulted from low
nitrification efficiency and a low concentration of available NO − . In the first series, the concentration
nitrification efficiency and a low concentration of available NOxx−.3In the first series, the concentration
of removed nitrogen compounds was 23.72 ± 2.17 mg N/dm . In the second series, the efficiency
of removed nitrogen compounds was 23.72 ± 2.17 mg N/dm3. In the second series, the efficiency of
of denitrification was 92.36 ± 2.62%, while the concentration of removed nitrogen compounds was
denitrification was 92.363 ± 2.62%, while the concentration of removed nitrogen compounds was
16.44 ± 1.52 mg N/dm . In the third series, the denitrification efficiency was 87.59 ± 4.60%, while
16.44 ± 1.52 mg N/dm3. In the third series, the denitrification efficiency was 87.593 ± 4.60%, while the
the concentration of removed nitrogen compounds was 15.45 ± 3.41 mg N/dm . The decrease in the
concentration of removed nitrogen compounds was 15.45 ± 3.41 mg N/dm3. The decrease in the
efficiency of nitrogen removal at a lower concentration of organic compounds most probably resulted
efficiency of nitrogen removal at a lower concentration of organic compounds most probably
from the lower amount of available organic compounds and the better oxygenation of the biofilm. This
resulted from the lower amount of available organic compounds and the better oxygenation of the
was confirmed by the nitrogen removal in the control reactor in the first series, in which the process
biofilm. This was confirmed by the nitrogen removal in the control reactor in the first series, in
efficiency was 45.73 ± 2.85% and the nitrification efficiency reached almost 50%, which indicated good
which the process efficiency was 45.73 ± 2.85% and the nitrification efficiency reached almost 50%,
oxygen conditions inside the membrane.
which indicated good oxygen conditions inside the membrane.
4. Conclusions
4. Conclusions
The study showed that the effective removal of nitrogen compounds from wastewater occurred
The study showed that the effective removal of nitrogen compounds from wastewater occurred
across a very wide temperature range. The applied filling and properly selected operating parameters
across a very wide temperature range. The applied filling and properly selected operating
of the reactors resulted in effective nitrification and reduction of oxidized nitrogen forms to gaseous
parameters of the reactors resulted in effective nitrification and reduction of oxidized nitrogen
nitrogen. Therefore the removal of nitrogen compounds was possible due to simultaneous nitrification
forms to gaseous nitrogen. Therefore the removal of nitrogen compounds was possible due to
and denitrification, in which carbon sources were organic compounds contained in the wastewater.
Water 2019, 11, 630 15 of 17

Maintaining a proper relationship between the amount of carbon and nitrogen in the treated
wastewater, through the simultaneous application of de-icing agents containing urea and easily
biodegradable carbon compounds, can ensure the effective removal of pollutants at low temperatures.
Table S7. Dependent variable: concentration of removed nitrogen as a results of biomass synthesis,
qualitative variable: temperature. Table S8. Dependent variable: efficiency of organic compounds
removal, qualitative variable: temperature. Table S9. Dependent variable: efficiency of organic
compounds removal, qualitative variable: ratio C/N. Table S10. Dependent variable: concentration of
organic compounds in treated wastewater, qualitative variable: ratio C/N.

Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at http://www.mdpi.com/2073-4441/11/3/630/s1,

Table S1. Composition of model wastewater. Table S2. Dependent variable: nitrification efficiency, qualitative
variable: temperature. Table S3. Dependent variable: denitrification efficiency, qualitative variable: temperature.
Table S4. Dependent variable: efficiency of nitrogen compounds removal, qualitative variable: temperature.
Table S5. Dependent variable: efficiency of nitrogen compounds removal, qualitative variable: ratio C/N.
Table S6. Dependent variable: concentration of removed nitrogen as a result of denitrification, qualitative variable:
temperature. Table S7. Dependent variable: concentration of removed nitrogen as a results of biomass synthesis,
qualitative variable: temperature. Table S8. Dependent variable: efficiency of organic compounds removal,
qualitative variable: temperature. Table S9. Dependent variable: efficiency of organic compounds removal,
qualitative variable: ratio C/N. Table S10. Dependent variable: concentration of organic compounds in treated
wastewater, qualitative variable: ratio C/N. Table S11. Nitrification and denitrification efficiencies and processes
in different bioreactor configurations under the conditions tested.
Author Contributions: J.R. developed the research idea and planned the research activities. K.O. carried out the
research, including collecting the input data and prepared manuscript. W.J. supervised the research activities
and reviewed the final draft of the manuscript. A.M. carried out a statistical analysis of the obtained results.
All authors have read and approved the final manuscript.
Funding: This research was funded by the National Science Centre, Poland grant number [No. DEC-2012/05/
N/ST8/02582] and the University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn, Poland. grant number [18.610.008-300].
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Raspati, G.S.; Haug Lindseth, H.K.; Muthanna, T.M.; Azrague, K. Potential of biofilters for treatment of
de-icing chemicals. Water 2018, 10, 620. [CrossRef]
2. Pressl, A.; Pucher, B.; Scharf, B.; Langergraber, G. Treatment of de-icing contaminated surface water runoff
along an airport runway using in-situ soil enriched with structural filter materials. Sci. Total Environ. 2019,
660, 321–328. [CrossRef]
3. Ariyajunya, B.; Tarun, P.K.; Chen, V.C.P.; Kim, S.B. Modeling the impact of airport deicing/anti-icing activities
on the dissolved oxygen levels in the receiving waterways. J. Water Manag. Model. 2018, 26. [CrossRef]
4. Shi, X.; Quilty, S.M.; Long, T.; Jayakaran, A.; Fay, L.; Xu, G. Managing airport stormwater containing deicers:
Challenges and opportunities. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng. 2017, 11, 35–46. [CrossRef]
5. United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). Technical Development Document for the Final Effluent
Limitations Guidelines and New Source Performance Standards for the Airport Deicing Category; EPA-821-R-12-005;
Engineering and Analysis Division: Washington, DC, USA, 2012.
6. Freeman, A.I.; Surridge, B.W.J.; Matthews, M.; Stewart, M.; Haygarth, P.M. New approaches to enhance
pollutant removal in artificially aerated wastewater treatment systems. Sci. Total Environ. 2018, 627,
1182–1194. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
7. Andersen, H.R.; Lee, H.; Yavuz, C.T.; Kim, H.; Ko, D.; Hwang, Y. Applicability of disulfide-polymer particles
surface embedded on alginate beads for cadmium removal from airport derived stormwater. J. Environ.
Chem. Eng. 2018, 6, 4124–4129.
8. Dou, T.; Troesch, S.; Petitjean, A.; Gábor, P.T.; Esser, D. Wastewater and rainwater management in urban
areas: A role for constructed wetlands. Procedia Environ. Sci. 2017, 37, 535–541. [CrossRef]
9. Fox, B.J.; Holland, W.B.; Boyd, F.L.; Blackwell, B.F.; Armstrong, J.B. Use of stormwater impoundments near
airports by birds recognized as hazardous to aviation safety. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2013, 119, 64–73. [CrossRef]
Water 2019, 11, 630 16 of 17

10. Freeman, A.I.; Surridge, B.W.J.; Matthews, M.; Stewart, M.; Haygarth, P.M. Understanding and managing
de-icer contamination of airport surface waters: A synthesis and future perspectives. Environ. Technol. Innov.
2015, 3, 46–62. [CrossRef]
11. Chen, M.; Chen, Y.; Dong, S.; Lan, S.; Zhou, H.; Tan, Z.; Li, X. Mixed nitrifying bacteria culture under different
temperature dropping strategies: Nitrification performance, activity, and community. Chemosphere 2018, 195,
800–809. [CrossRef]
12. Yuan, J.; Dong, W.; Sun, F.; Zhao, K. Low temperature effects on nitrification and nitrifier community
structure in V-ASP for decentralized wastewater treatment and its improvement by bio-augmentation.
Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2018, 25, 6584–6595. [CrossRef]
13. Paredes, D.; Kuschk, P.; Mbwette, T.S.A.; Stange, F.; Müler, R.A.; Köser, H. New aspects of microbial nitrogen
transformations in the context of wastewater treatment—A review. Eng. Life Sci. 2007, 7, 13–25. [CrossRef]
14. Young, B.; Delatolla, R.; Kennedy, K.; Laflamme, E.; Stintzi, A. Low temperature MBBR nitrification:
Microbiome analysis. Water Res. 2017, 111, 224–233. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
15. Ducey, T.F.; Vanotti, M.B.; Shriner, A.D.; Szogi, A.A.; Ellison, A.Q. Characterization of a microbial community
capable of nitrification at cold temperature. Bioresour. Technol. 2010, 101, 491–500. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
16. Hoilijoki, T.H.; Kettunen, R.H.; Rintala, J.A. Nitrification of aerobically pretreated municipal landfill leachate
at low temperature. Water Res. 2000, 34, 1435–1446. [CrossRef]
17. Rostron, W.; Stuckey, D.C.; Young, A.A. Nitrification of high strength ammonia wastewaters: Comparative
study of immobilization media. Water Res. 2001, 35, 1169–1178. [CrossRef]
18. Zou, J.; Xu, G.; Pan, K.; Zhou, W.; Dai, Y.; Wang, X.; Zhang, D.; Hu, Y.-C.; Ma, M. Nitrogen removal and
biofilm structure affected by COD/NH4+–N in a biofilter with porous sludge-ceramsite. Sep. Purif. Technol.
2012, 94, 9–15. [CrossRef]
19. Ruitz, G.; Jeison, D.; Chamy, R. Nitrification with nitrite accumulation for the treatment in wastewater with
high ammonia concentration. Water Res. 2003, 37, 1371–1377.
20. Carrera, J.; Vicent, T.; Lafuente, F.J. Influence of temperature on denitrification of an industrial high-strength
nitrogen wastewater in a two-sludge system. Water SA 2003, 29, 11–16. [CrossRef]
21. Chen, D.; Chen, X.; Huang, X.; He, S.; Huang, J.; Zhou, W. Controlling denitrification accompanied with
nitrite accumulation at the sediment-water interface. Ecol. Eng. 2017, 100, 194–198. [CrossRef]
22. He, S.; Ding, L.; Pan, Y.; Hu, H.; Ye, L.; Ren, H. Nitrogen loading effects on nitrification and denitrification
with functional gene quantity/transcription analysis in biochar packed reactors at 5 ◦ C. Sci. Rep. 2018,
8, 9844. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
23. Białowiec, A.; Janczukowicz, W.; Krzemieniewski, M. The fly ash from sewage sludge thermal treatment
recovery as LECA for constructed wetlands. In Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Solid
Waste Technology and Management, Philadelphia, PA, USA, 15–18 March 2009.
24. PN-82/C-04576.08 Water and Wastewater. Determinations of Nitrogen Compounds. Determination of Nitrite
Nitrogen with The Colorimetric Method Using Sodium Salicylate. (In Polish)
25. PN-EN26777:1999 Water Quality. Determination of Nitrite. Molecular Absorption Spectrometric Method. (In Polish)
26. PN-C-04576-04:1994 Water and Wastewater. Determinations of Nitrogen Compounds. Determination of Ammonium
Nitrogen in Water by Direct Nesslerization. (In Polish)
27. PN-EN 25663:2001 Water Quality. Determination of Kjeldahl Nitrogen. Method after Mineralization with Selenium.
(In Polish)
28. PN-ISO 6060:2006 Water and Wastewater. Research on Oxygen Demand and Organic Carbon Content. Determination
of Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) by Dichromate Method. (In Polish)
29. Wyffels, S.; Pynaert, K.; Boeckx, P.; Verstraete, W.; Van Cleemput, O. Identification and quantification of
nitrogen removal in a rotating biological contactor by 15 N tracer techniques. Water Res. 2003, 37, 1252–1259.
[CrossRef]
30. Zhang, S.; Wang, Y.; He, W.; We, M.; Xing, M.; Yang, J.; Gao, N.; Yin, D. Responses of biofilm characteristics
to variations in temperature and NH4 + -N loading in a moving-bed biofilm reactor treating micro-polluted
raw water. Bioresour. Technol. 2013, 131, 365–373. [CrossRef]
31. Hoang, V.; Delatolla, R.; Laflamme, E.; Gadbois, A. An investigation of moving bed biofilm reactor
nitrification during long-term exposure to cold temperatures. Water Environ. Res. 2014, 86, 36–42. [CrossRef]
Water 2019, 11, 630 17 of 17

32. Zhou, H.X.; Li, X.K.; Chu, Z.R.; Zhang, J. Effect of temperature downshifts on a bench-scale hybrid
A/O system: Process performance and microbial community dynamics. Chemosphere 2016, 153, 500–507.
[CrossRef]
33. Rajeshwari, K.; Balakrishnan, M.; Kansal, A.; Lata, K.; Kishore, V.V. State-of-the-art of anaerobic digestion
technology for industrial wastewater treatment. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2000, 4, 135–156. [CrossRef]
34. Ge, S.; Wang, S.; Yang, X.; Qiu, S.; Li, B.; Peng, Y. Detection of nitrifiers and evaluation of partial nitrification
for wastewater treatment: A review. Chemosphere 2015, 140, 85–98. [CrossRef]
35. Guo, J.; Peng, Y.; Huang, H.; Wang, S.; Ge, S.; Zhang, J.; Wang, Z. Short- and long-term effects of temperature
on partial nitrification in a sequencing batch reactor treating domestic wastewater. J. Hazard. Mater. 2010,
179, 471–479. [CrossRef]
36. Elgood, Z.; Robertson, W.D.; Schiff, S.L. Greenhouse gas production in a stream bed bioreactor for nitrate
removal. J. Ecol. Eng. 2010, 36, 1575–1580. [CrossRef]
37. Liu, T.; Quan, X.; Li, D. Evaluations of biofilm thickness and dissolved oxygen on single stage anammox
process in an up-flow biological aerated filter. Biochem. Eng. J. 2017, 119, 20–26. [CrossRef]
38. Wang, W.; Wang, Y.; Wang, X.; Zhang, Y.; Yan, Y. Dissolved oxygen microelectrode measurements to develop
a more sophisticated intermittent aeration regime control strategy for biofilm-based CANON systems.
Chem. Eng. J. 2019, 365, 165–174. [CrossRef]
39. Andersen, H.R.; Smets, B.F.; Bester, K.; Polesel, F.; Trapp, S.; Plósz, B.G.; Torresi, E.; Christensson, M. Diffusion
and sorption of organic micropollutants in biofilms with varying thicknesses. Water Res. 2017, 123, 388–400.
40. Zheng, Z.; Huang, S.; Bian, W.; Liang, D.; Wang, X.; Zhang, K.; Ma, X.; Li, J. Enhanced nitrogen removal
of the simultaneous partial nitrification, anammox and denitrification (SNAD) biofilm reactor for treating
mainstream wastewater under low dissolved oxygen (DO) concentration. Bioresour. Technol. 2019. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
41. Puznava, N.; Payraudeau, M.; Thornberg, D. Simultaneous nitrification and denitrification in biofilters with
real time aeration control. Water Sci. Technol. 2001, 43, 269–276. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
42. Zinatizadeh, A.A.L.; Ghaytooli, E. Simultaneous nitrogen and carbon removal from wastewater at different
operating conditions in a moving bed biofilm reactor (MBBR): Process modeling and optimization. J. Taiwan
Inst. Chem. Eng. 2015, 53, 98–111. [CrossRef]
43. Choo, K.H.; Stensel, H.D. Sequencing batch membrane reactor treatment: Nitrogen removal and membrane
fouling evaluation. Water Environ. Res. 2000, 72, 490–498. [CrossRef]

© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).