Biological Elimination of VOCs in Biofilter
K. Kiared, 1. Bibeau, R. Brzednski
Chemical Engineering Department and Biological Department
Universite' de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, QuCbec, Canada J1K 2R1
G. Vie1
Groupe Serrener Inc., 855 rue Pepin, Bureau 100, Sherbrooke, QuCbec, Canada J1L 2P8
M. Heitz
Chemical Engineering Department Universite de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada J1K 2R1
A laboratory scale biofilter system was used to eliminate
toluene and ethanol, the main solvents employed in
lacquering, from waste air. A specific micro-flora (mix-
ture of Bacillus for ethanol and two pseudomonas
speciesfor toluene) able to degrade ethanol and toluene,
was jimed on a packed bed of particles of commercial
peat intermittently humidified by a nutrient solution
necessaryfor the suroival of the micro-organisms.
In the experiments, polluted gas was fed upwara3
through the bed and pbysical parameten: moisture con-
tent ofpat; humidity of aic temperature;pressure drop;
inlevoutlet concentration of gas and microbialpopula-
tion were measured regularly in order to check the per-
formance of the biodegradation process.
These experiments showed good pe~ormanceand
good stability of the biofilter over time.
INTRODUCTION
The biofiltration process, which was originally devel-
oped for the odor abatement of waste gases (Pomeroy [ G] 1,
has proven recently to be an effective and inexpensive
method for the removal of Volatile Organic Compounds
(VOCs) produced during various industrial activities (Ot-
tengraf and van den Oever [ 5 ] )This
. technique is based
on the ability of micro-organisms (generally bacteria) to
convert, under aerobic conditions, organic pollutants to
water, carbon dioxide and biomass. The biofilter consists
generally of a simply structured packed bed, intensively
surrounded with an immobilized micro-flora. The contami-
nated gas is directed through a biolayer around the pack-
ing material. In practice, various types of packing material
are used, e.g. compost, soil, peat etc. (Rothenbuhler et al.
Correspondence concerning this paper should be addressed to M.
Hei2.2.
148 Fall, 1996
[ 71 and Wu et al.[ 1011. The filter bed material should have
certain mechanical and physical properties (structure, void
fraction, specific area, flow resistance and water retention
capacity), and biological properties (available provision of
inorganic nutrients and specific biological activity).
In the past decade, increasing attention has been paid to
biofiltration waste gas purification process due to some im-
portant advantages this technique has, comparing to con-
ventional purification methods. In addition to the mild op-
erating conditions, biological decontamination processes
do not generally transfer the pollution problem to another
environmental compartment (gas to solid and/or gas to
liquid), which is often the case with many other purifica-
tion methods. Moreover, biological treatment is especially
effective when the odorous or toxic waste gas emission is
in the lower concentration range, i.e. at the ppm level.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A schematic of the experimental set-up of the lab scale
biofilter is shown in Figure 1. The biofilter was a PVC col-
umn with a diameter of 0.15 m and a height of 1.20 m. The
column was filled with a humidified and conditioned and
sieved granules of peak supported at the bottom by a per-
forated sieve plate. Polystyrene particles were placed in the
bottom of the column in order to distribute the gas before
entering the filter bed. The packing was inoculated with a
specific micro-flora. A nutrient solution (mainly Na HPO, ,
KH PO,, NH ,C1) was intermittently pumped over the sup-
port material to maintain the layer of water, to supply the
micro-organisms with nutrients and to prevent drying out
of the filter and the consequent loss of biological activity.
Contaminated air flows upwards through the peat bed and
cleaned air is evacuated at the top of the column. To keep
the moisture content of the filter bed at a desired level be-
meen 50-7096 (Ottengraf and van den Oever [ 5 ] )inflow-
,
ing gas was saturated with water in a separate humidifica-
Environmental Progress (Vol. 15, No. 3 )
 cleaned
4 n 100 3 1
-
air
e
solven
80

1
c)

9
2 60

*a
a
8
g 40
c)

3 20
.
-
-
. low
0 medium
0
0-
'00
0

0 , I
flowmeter
$3 n-
high
I . 1 . I . I

FIGURE 1 Experimental set up.
tion column outside the filter bed. Flow rates were mea-
sured by volumetric flow meters, the relative humidity of
the air was measured at the entrance of the biofilter with a
humidity sensor which also measures the temperature of
inlet air. The moisture content (% of water content based
on total mass of the solid) at three levels of the biofilter was
measured by difference in weight of the samples, before
and after drying at 110°C. Temperatures were measured us-
ing three thermocouples, inserted at three different levels
of the biofilter. For determination of microbial counts, 1
gram of filtering medium was ground in 10 ml of buffered
salt solution consisting of 0.6% Na,HPO,, 0.3% KH,PO,
and 0.1%NH.Cl. After extensive vortexing, the suspension
was cleared by centrifugation (500 rpm, 1 min.). The su-
pernatant was appropriately diluted and plated on nutrient
agar plates consisting of 0.5% Tryptone (Difco); 0.25% Yeast
Extract (Difco), 0.1%Dextrose and 1.5% Dextrose and 1.5%
agar. The plates were incubated 48 h at 25°C. Bacterial
counts were expressed in c.f.u. (colony-formingunits) per
gram of medium.
The feed to the biofilter was a synthetic waste gas con-
taining between 200 and 1000 ppm (v/v) of ethanol or
toluene. After a period of acclimatization, generally one
week, the performance of the unit could be assessed.
During one month of experimentation, the biofilter was
loaded with toluene or ethanol at volumetric load of 70.70
m3/m2.h. Toluene and ethanol concentrations were mea-
sured by a total hydrocarbon analyzer equipped with a
flame ionization detector and calibrated for each com-
pound. The characteristics of the filter bed and the operat-
ing conditions are summarized in Table 1.
TABLE 1. Characteristics of the Filter Bed and Operating
Conditions
10 20 30 40 5 0 60
Time (days)
FIGURE 2 Moisture content of the peat versus time.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
Physical kspects
Moisture Content of tbe Peat
Figure 2 shows the moisture content of the peat mea-
sured over time after the stabilization period. The results
presented refer to toluene experiments, but the same be-
havior was obtained with ethanol. Humidity content of
samples taken at the upper and mid points of the column
maintained a stable level at around 70% while samples at
the lower point remained below 60%. Humidity at the base
of the column was due to the fact that the air entering the
biofilter was saturated at a temperature of 18°C while oper-
atory temperature of the bed was around 25°C. The very
low humidity level of the peat, e.g. 38% at day 34, were
observed following a period of non-humidification.
Pressure Drop
The total pressure drop in the filter bed was measured
daily by a liquid differential manometer. The pressure drop
obtained was low ( < 6 cm H ,O/rn) suggesting the ab-
sence of both compacting problems and excess biomass
growth into the packing.
Fi&r Bed p H
The measured pH of the filter material showed that the
medium remained at a neutral pH during the operation
(between 7 and 8). In this case no acid intermediates are
produced and consequently no additional buffering opera-
tion is needed, the natural buffering effect of the nutrient
solution being sufficient.

height of the packing 1.2 m Residence Time DisMution (RTD)

temperature 25-30°C
VOCs concentrations in waste Until now, very few studies have discussed the RTD
measurements in biofilters which characterize a macromix-
gases (g/m')
Toluene 0.75-3.76 ing phenomena of the gas phase through a wet porous
Ethanol 1.89 media. Experiments were carried out using the same peat
pressure drop < 6 cm H,O/m without micro-organisms. The dynamic method is illus-
superficial air velocity 70.70 m3/m2.h trated here by analyzing purge-step-response experiment
humidity of air at the irilet of biofilter for toluene in air. The residence time distribution can be
93%
51 sec directly obtained by deriving the F-curve which represents
mean residence time of the gas phase
the response of the system at a step perturbation of the

Environmental Progress (Vol. 15, No. 3 ) Fall, 1996 149

 le-3
le-3 u
v 1000 2000 3000 4000
Time (s)
FIGURE 3 Example of an RTD curve.
toluene concentration. It is given by the following equa-
tion:
where at) is the residence time distribution and F(t) is
the curve response.
Figure 3 presents an example of RTD curve obtained by
charting results of experiments on the biofilter under fixed
operating conditions. Examination of the R T D curve re-
veals the long tail of the curve that is probably due to dead
zones inside the filter bed (regions where gas-solid and
gas-liquid mass transfer are very low). In addition, the
asymmetrical path of the curve suggests that the gas flows
throughout the bed in a plug flow manner affected by axial
dispersion. This result is important because it permits
quantification of the dead volume which reduces the effi-
ciency of the filter bed to degrade VOC.
Reaction Aspects
Removal E W m q
Figures 4a and 4b present, for ethanol and toulene, the
removal efficiency versus time. During one month of ex-
perimentation, the conversion of ethanol remained around
80%. However, for toluene the situation was quite differ-
ent; the figure shows the conversion and its direct relation
with the humidity content of the peat. After the stabiliza-
tion period and until day 32 the conversion was stable
around 70%. After humidification was stopped, the humid-
ity content of the peat markedly declined, particularly in the
lower region, and the conversion of toluene was reduced.
After restarting the humidification of the filter bed, a higher
humidity content was established (see Figure 2) and con-
version of toluene returned to about 70%. The biofilm be-
ing essentially a thin film of water, reducing humidity con-
tent in the biofilter may affect gas absorption and also the
survival of the micro-organisms, and consequently the per-
formance of the process.
Elimination Capacity
The most important parameter used for designing biofil-
ters is the elimination capacity, EC; since it relates the inlet
150 Fall, 1996
.. "
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Time (days)
FIGURE 4a. Removal efficiency of ethanol versus time.
25 30 35 40 45 50 55
Time (days)
FIGURE 4b. Removal efficiency of toluene versus time.
load of pollutant to be treated to its removal efficiency.
Figures 5a and 5b respectively present the EC of ethanol
and toluene versus time. Both figures show that the EC is
very sensitive to the inlet load of the pollutant. During one
month of experimentation, the maximum elimination ca-
pacity of ethanol was around 120 g/h.m3 obtained at an
inlet load of around 135 g/h.m3. On the other hand, a
maximum elimination capacity for toluene of 70 g/h.m3
was obtained at an inlet load around 100 g/h.m3. These
performances are good if compared to those obtained by
other authors (see Table 2).
Bacterial Count
Figures 6a and 6b present the bacterial count (BC) for
ethanol and toluene respectively. Figure ba, for ethanol,
shows a low value in the startup period. After one week of
acclimatization, the bacterial count reached 1013 cfu/g
packing and stabilized thereafter at a reasonable value of
10' cfu/g. On the other hand, the bacterial count of toluene
measured at three levels in the biofilter and presented in
Figure 6b does not show a clear profile of the BC through
the biofilter. Globally the bacterial count ranged between
lo9 and 10l2 cfi/g. Although the low level was relatively
dry, its BC was relatively low (if compared to the two other
levels), but a mean value of lo9 cfu/g was observed con-
firming the good resistance of the micro-flora inoculated
under local and temporary dryness conditions.
Environmental Progress (Vol. 15, No. 3 )
 140
120 -
h
M
(r1
0
100 v
Y
0 c
-r' 60
E 80
8
I
3

Q
.I
L
Q)
CI
0 inlet load 0

0 eliminationcapacity
,
i
I I
3 6 10 13 18 20
0 Time (days)
0 10 20 30
Time (days) FIGURE 6a. Biofiltration of ethanol: Bacterial count.

FIGURE 5a. Eliminationcapacity and inlet load of ethanol.

-
A
M
3
(r

120 W
0

100 e
3
8
c) 80
E
-i60
M
40
29 3 2 3 6 3 8 43 4 5 50 5 2
20 1 o elimination capacity Time (days)
0 FIGURE 6b. Biofiltration of toluene: Bacterial count.
25 35 45 55
Time (days) less than 6 cm H,O per meter of biofilter, for most of the
experimental period.
FIGURE 5b. Elimination capacity and inlet load of toluene. The RTD measurements showed that the gaseous phase
was in plug flow affected by axial dispersion.
Good performance was obtained in terms of removal ef-
CONCLUSION ficiency and elimination capacity compared to those re-
A laboratory scale biofiltration process was carried out to ported in the literature, for ethanol and toluene.
remove vapors of ethanol and toluene present in air. Peat Bacterial count provided valuable information about the
was chosen to serve as filter material. Under typical operat- microbial population present in the filter bed. The micro-
ing conditions, the following conclusions can be drawn: organisms selected and used here maintained a good level
The commercial peat offered favorable life environment of activity even under local dryness conditions (as has gen-
for micro-flora, at the moisture content investigated. erally been the case in biofiltration).
The pH of the medium, measured regularly, was stable
around the neutral value (pH = 7). Hence, no acid inter- NOTATION
mediates were produced and consequently no buffering BC = bacterial count, cfu/g of packing material
agent was needed. The pressure drop was also minimal, i.e. t ) = residence time distribution (RTD)
EC = elimination capacity, g/h.m3
TABLE 2. Elimination Capacity (g/ h.m3) Found by Other f l t ) = response curve (signal)
Authors t = time, s

Ethanol Toluene
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Jol and Dragt, 1988 35 -
Ottengraf et al., 1983 - 20 The authors are indebted to the Ministere de 1'Environ-
Leson and Winer, 1992 - 35 nement et de la faune, Quebec, Canada and to Le Conseif
Hodge ef al., 199;: 220 - de Recherche en Sciences Naturelles etongenic du
Liu et al.. 1994 - 51 Canada/CRSNG) for financial support. The authors wish to
- 57 express their gratitude to E. Gaudreault, M. L. Brown and
Tdhraoui et al., 1994
S. Lebrun.

Environmental Progress (Vol. 15, No. 3 ) Fall. 1996 151

LITERATURE CITED
1. Hodge, D. S., et al., “Biofiltration:Application for VOC
Emission Control,” 47th Purdue University Industrial
Conference Proceedings, 1992, Lewis Publishers, Inc.,
Chelsea, Michigan, pp. 610-619 (1992).
2. Jol,A, and A. J. Dragt, “Biotechnological Elimina-
tion of Volatile Organic Compounds in Waste Gases,”
Dechema Biotechnology Conference, Vol. 2, Bioreact.
Downstream Process., Process React. Modell., Biopro-
cesses, pp. 373-389 (1988).
3. Won, G., and A. M. W h e r , “Biofiltration: An Inno-
vative Air Pollution Control Technology for VOC Emis-
sions,”J. Air & Waste Management Association, 41,8,
pp. 1045-1053 (1991).
4. Uu, P. K. T., et al., “Engineered Biofilter for Remov-
ing Organic Contaminants in Air,” J. Air & Waste Man-
agement Association, 48, pp. 299-303 (1994).
5. Ottengraf, S. P. P., and A. € C.
I.van den Oever,
“Kinetics of Organic Compound Removal from Waste
152 Fall, 1996
Gases with a Biological Filter,”Biotechnol. Bioeng., 12,
25, pp. 3089-3102 (1983).
6. Pomeroy, R. D., “Deodorizing Gas Streams by the Use
of Microbiological Growths,” Patent: US Patent:
2,793,096 (1957).
7 . Rothenbiihler, M., et al., “Biofiltrationof Volatile Or-
ganic Emissions in Reference to Flexographic Printing
Processes,”Water, Air and Soil Pollution, 83, pp. 37-50
(1995).
8. Tahraoui, K., et al., “Biodegradation of BTX from
Waste Gases in a Biofilter Reactor,” J. Air & Waste
Management Association, 87th Annual Meeting and
Exhibition, Cincinnati, Ohio, pp. 2-13 Oune 1994).
9. van Groenestijn, J. W., and P. G. M. Hesselink,
“Biotechniques for Air Pollution Control,” Biodegrada-
tion, 4, 4, pp. 283-301 (1993).
10. Wu, G., et al., “Biofiltration of Volatile Organic Emis-
sions,” Proceedings of the First North America Confer-
ence and Exhibition, “Emerging Clean Air Technolc-
gies and Business Opportunities,” Poster session,
26-30 September, Toronto, Canada (1994).
Environmental Progress (Vol. 15, No. 3 )