Industrial Pollution Management 6 Oct

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/320410818
Industrial Pollution Management
Book · January 2017
CITATIONS READS
9 37,580
2 authors:
Rajesh Kumar Lohchab . Jitender Kumar Saini

Guru Jambheshwar University of Science & Technology Guru Jambheshwar University of Science & Technology
62 PUBLICATIONS 454 CITATIONS 11 PUBLICATIONS 24 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Papermaking View project
impact Assessment of Rajeeev Gandhi thermal power Plant View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Rajesh Kumar Lohchab on 10 February 2018.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Industrial Pollution
Management
Industrial Pollution
Management
Rajesh Kumar Lohchab

Associate Professor, Department of Environmental Science and
Engineering, Guru Jambheshwar University of Science and
Technology, Hisar
Jitender Kumar Saini

Research Scholar, Department of Environmental Science and
Engineering, Guru Jambheshwar University of Science and
Technology, Hisar
I A H RW Pu b l i c a t i o n s
Copyright © Rajesh Kumar and Jitender Saini, 2018
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or utilized in
any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying,
recording or by any information storage or retrieval system, without
permission in writing from the publisher.
First published in 2018 by

IAHRW Publications Private Limited
768P, First Floor, Sector 39
Gurugram, Haryana
ISBN: 978-93-821201-7-9
Contents
Preface vii
1. Introduction 1
2. Industrial Wastewater Pollution 7
3. Analytical Methods For Industrial Wastewater 13
4. Industrial Wastewater Management 23
5. Biological Treatment of Industrial Waste 35
6. Food Processing Industries 47
7. asb Treatment of Wastewater of Food Processing

U
Industry Manufacturing Biscuit, Cake, Candy Etc. 51
8. Treatment of Distillery Waste 57
9. Treatment of Dairy Waste 63
10. Treatment of Rice Mill Wastewater 71
11. Treatment of Pharmaceutical Waste 77
About the Authors 83

Preface
T he purpose of this book is to bring together and integrate the

treatment of different industrial wastewater by using up flow
anaerobic sludge blanket reactor in a single text. Industrial effluents
have great potential for recovery and reuse, predominantly the
organic waste containing effluents and they can be effectively treated
by biological means to yield useful end products like methane gas as
a source of energy and digested slurry as a soil conditioner.
The book presents a balance between theory and practice. Theory
is essential for understanding the working principles of wastewater
treatment and practice is associated with direct application of con-
cepts for research and industrial purposes. This book divided into
eleven chapters. First five chapter covers the theory of different
techniques use to treat industrial wastewater and last six chapters
includes detailed practical application and research findings of
UASB treatment of industrial wastewater like Food Processing
Industry, Dairy Industry, Distillery, Rice Mill and Pharmaceutical.
This book is an attempt to place before the readers the best ways
and means used by researcher, scientist and engineers to minimize
industrial pollution of our environment and their applicability in
industries. In this book findings of our research on UASB treatment
of different industrial wastewater for acheiving the minimum impacts
on environment is given. We have refererred to a number of books,
vii
viii Industrial Pollution Management
research paper, proceeding of conferences, symposia, handbooks and

manuals on wastewater treatment during writing of this book and we
have acknowledged all of them.
It is hoped that this reference book will be found useful by stu-
dents, researchers and teaching faculties of education institutes con-
cerned with the subject of Environmental Sciences. Industrialist
especially in sector of food processing industry can found it useful
when they adopt pollution control techniques in their industries. All
suggestions for improvement of this book will be highly appreciated
and will give us an opportunity to further replenish the information.
We are grateful to our family members and friends for their
encouragement and constant source of inspiration during writing of
this book.
Chapter 1
Introduction
B efore man start agriculture, he was a hunter and gather with few
requirements and small population, thus he has negligible
impacts on the environment. After start of agriculture and industri-
alization our requirement has increased many folds. With growth of
human population industrialization and technological development,
man attitude towards nature has been changed and we have over
exploited natural resources to raise our living standard thereby caus-
ing very adverse impacts on the environment. At present our civiliza-
tion has reached to its zenith leading to environmental degradation
to such a level that it is getting difficult to make it safer for human
being and other living plants and animals.
Industrialization during 19th century changed mankind’s life-
style and gave a new pace at which knowledge was gathered and new
substances or technology came. Thus, new knowledge and techno-
logical development make our life easy and comfortable but our
environment is getting polluted day by day by release of harmful
industrial effluents in the form of air and water pollutants and haz-
ardous substances. Environmental pollution is now become a serious
problem at world level and environmental issue never happened in
human history are being raised now a day’s creating serious environ-
ment conflicts in the form of pollution of air and water, with release
of persistent toxic chemicals leading to serious ecological and envi-
ronmental problem (Singh and Singh, 2006).
The term environment has been derived from French word
“Environia” means to surround. Surrounding in which man sustains
1
2 Industrial Pollution Management
its life process which affects the growth and development of living
beings. Environmental pollution means the presence of harmful
substances or products into the the environment. As per EPA, 1986
water pollution is caused by release of toxic and hazardous pollutants
into surface water bodies i.e. river lakes, stream etc. and ground
water bodies i.e. non- confined and confined aquifers. Polluted
water is inappropriate for use in industry and unfit for drinking pur-
pose and can adversely affect recreation and agriculture uses. It reduces
the aesthetic beauty of lakes and rivers. It is impossible to escape from
the affects of water pollution. As per EPA, 1986 release of particulate
matter i.e. respirable suspended particulate matter (RSPM) and non
respirable suspended particulate matter (NRSPM) and gases like CO2,
CO, SOx, NOx, polyaromatic hydrocarbon etc. into earth atmos-
phere are mainly responsible for air pollution. Air pollution adversely
affects the living beings like plant and food crops and non livings
things are like properties, historic monuments etc. Disposal of hazard-
ous substances on land causes pollution of soil and ground water
contamination. Consumption of this contaminated water and cultiva-
tion of crops on polluted soil adversely affects the health of plants and
animals including human beings. Disposal of solid waste on land
surface is anaesthetic and it spread harmful diseases as well.
Industrial revolution without control is non-sustainable in long
run as new synthetic persistent chemicals having long lasting effects
on the environment are being introduced into the environment.
Industrial waste is process waste produced during manufacturing of
products, thus nature of waste produced vary from industry to
industry and product to product. Different industries vary in quan-
tity and quality depending upon raw material used and product
manufactured. Bio-processing industries like dairies, distilleries,
pharmaceuticals and confectionaries may generate high or low
strength wastewater (Ganesh et al. 2007).
Industrialization, urbanization and population growth resulted
in environmental imbalance due to resource exploitation. Water
and air are most essential for survival of living being are worst
affected by industrial and technological development. The 70% of
the earth is covered by water in the form of oceans. Global water
Chapter 1 Introduction 3
pollution scenario suggests that a large section of people lack safe

drinking water resulting in millions of deaths by waterborne dis-
eases such as cholera and hepatitis every year. Ruthless forest cut-
ting, release of toxic gases to atmosphere and dumping of liquid
waste into sea, rivers and lakes etc. polluted our environment.
In India, situation of water resources is very critical because India
has 16% of world’s population and about 2.45% of worlds land area
but available world’s water resources are about 4%. India has already
facing the grave drinking water crisis and today water is one of the
largest problems India facing. The main industries contributing to
water pollution are pulp and paper industries, textile industry and
various food processing industries.
Industrialization is essential for economic growth of any nation
as it acts as a vehicle for development. To fulfil the basic require-
ments of increasing population, different types of industries have
been set up in different regions of our country. These industries
include pulp and paper, textile, fertilizer, sugar, pharmaceutical and
distilleries. The fermentation industry is considered as one of the
most polluting industry and has posed serious environmental prob-
lems throughout the world. Modern life style with increasing popu-
lation and industrial growth has lead to serious impacts of human
activity on environment at global scale. This has resulted in tremen-
dous increase in quantity and quality of pollutants in wastewater
(Asamudo et. al., 2005).
Environmental pollution is necessary evil of all development
because organic and inorganic chemicals are disposed off into the air
and water in the form of solids, liquid and slurry. Huge amount of
different chemicals are also being released into the environment in
the form of industrial effluent which are responsible for environ-
mental pollution especially the pollution of water bodies (Metcalf
and Eddy, 2003, Sauza et al., 2004). Accumulation of harmful toxic
substances in air, water and soil adversely affect the environment and
living beings by bioaccumulation and biomagnifications.
These days, pollutants are present in air, water and soil in such a
concentration that it is injurious to human health and environment.
Air pollution, water pollution and scarcity, falling ground water
tables, poor management of waste, loss of forest and biodiversity and

land/soil degradation are one of the primary causes of diseases,
health issues and long term livelihood.
Unauthorised release of industrial wastewater having toxic chem-
icals without treatment into water bodies is mainly responsible for
health hazards in living beings and such pollutants are mainly
responsible to pollute our holy rivers like Ganga, Yamuna etc. to an
extent that water of these rivers becomes unfit for drinking, bathing
and other purposes. These rivers water is beyond the level of purifica-
tion making it an impossible task to clean them even after spending
huge amount of money and use of technology. Thus, it is necessary
to treat the wastewater before their discharge into water bodies.
Various environmental acts prohibit discharging effluents into the
environment without their treatment to a level of permissible limits.
Different industries release different types of pollutants in varying
quantity; therefore, different treatment units operations and proc-
esses are used depending upon nature of waste.
The environment (Protection) Act, 1986 is the latest act enacted
by Government of India, to provide powers for the protection and
improvement of environment and health of human beings by pro-
hibiting industrial release of harmful substances and closing such
process or operations and regulation of electricity or water.
Physical, chemical and biological treatment methods are used to
treat wastewater. Biological methods are beneficial instead of chemi-
cal treatment due to less sludge production with high COD removal
in addition to economic benefits as no chemicals are required.
Physical treatment methods include sedimentation, floatation and
adsorption. Chemical treatment of wastewater by coagulants such as
calcium hydroxide, aluminum sulfate, ferric chloride and iron chlo-
ride results in about 94% removal of suspended matter and 89%
removal of phosphorus and average elimination of COD and TKN.
A physical-chemical treatment method is not been a viable technol-
ogy due to their high capital cost and environmental consideration
and low treatment efficiency in reducing the COD and BOD load.
Both, anaerobic and aerobic treatment methods are suggested to
treat industrial effluents having high biodegradable organic matter
like food processing industries but anaerobic treatment method is
Chapter 1 Introduction 5
found to be more attractive due to less energy requirements, low

sludge generation and generation of methane as a fuel with their
reasonable calorific value.
Rapid development of anaerobic digestion technology led to its
use in treating industrial waste all over the world. Its large scale
application started in 1914 in the Netherlands, where the process
was used for treating the wastewaters of straw based factory. In 1924,
anaerobic treatment of paper mill wastewater reached a pilot plant
stage in Germany. The first industrial application that is reasonably
documented is the treatment of waste of meat packing factory in
Minnesota (USA). For tropical countries, the major potential area of
application is for treating waste from industries based on sugar cane,
in particular the liquid waste from distilleries fermenting molasses.
Anaerobic digestion for this purpose was first used in India in
1960.
A balance is must between environment and development. This
can be done through sustainable development by meeting the need
of present population with taking care of future generation. Any
development which cannot provide clean air and safe water to its
people cannot be constructive and impractical for any country.
There is nothing more important than environment protection and
it should be our top priority (National Green Tribunal).
References
Asamudo N. U., Daba A.S. and Ezeronye O.U. (2005). Bioremediation of textile
effluent using phanerochaete chrysosporium. African Journal of Biotechnology,
4 (13): 1548-1553.
Ganesh P.S., Ramasamy E.V., Gajalakshmi S., Sanjeevi R. and Abbasi S. A. (2007).
Studies on treatment of low-strength effluents by UASB reactor and its applica-
tion to dairy industry wash waters. Indian Journal of Biotechnology, 6(2): 234-
238.
Metcalf L. and Eddy H.P. (2003). Waste Water Engineering. Tata McGraw Hill
Pub. Co., New Delhi.
Souza R.R., Bersolin I.T.L., Bioni T.L., Gimenes M.L. and Dias Filho B.P. (2004).
The performance of a three phase fluidizes bed reactor in treatment of wastewater
with organic load. Brazilian Journal of Chemical Engineering, 21(2): 219-227.
Chapter 2
Industrial Wastewater
Pollution
P ollutants find its way into water bodies and cause pollution of
water. Presence of contaminants in water bodies like river, lake,
stream and ground water to such an extent that became injurious to
health of animals plant and human being is called water pollution.
Major categories of water pollutants are as below:
• Nutrients Pollution like phosphate, nitrate etc.

• Organic Matter
• Microbiological i.e. disease causing agents
• Chemicals like acid and bases, salts, heavy metals, pesticide
etc.
• Suspended Solids
• Oil Spillage
• Radioactive Waste
• Thermal Pollution
Nutrients Pollution
Wastewater contains too much of nutrient like phosphate and
nitrate leads to eutrophication i.e. high growth of algae and aquatic
plants like water hyacinth. High growth of algae and aquatic plants
create high organic matter content in water body when they die.
7
Decomposition of this creates anaerobic condition by depleting

oxygen content of water body leading to death of aquatic fauna like
fishes by oxygen starvation.
Organic Matter
Biodegradation of organic matter in water bodies by micro organ-
isms which include aerobes and anaerobes consume dissolved oxy-
gen causing its depletion in the water body. In presence of high
organic matter content in water body, the dissolve oxygen reach to
such a level that aerobes may die leading to growth of anaerobic
microorganism which resulted in production of harmful toxins such
as ammonia and sulphides.
Organic Matter + O2+ Aerobic microorganism → CO2 + H2O

+ New cells
Organic Matter + Anaerobic microorganism → CH4 + CO2 + H2S

+ New cells
Microbiological Disease Causing Agents

It includes bacteria, viruses, protozoa and parasitic worms. These
infectious organisms cause diseases in infected individuals. Developing
and underdeveloped countries does not have enough resources, so
people living in these countries drink untreated water directly from
river or stream contaminated by disease causing microorganism.
Diseases caused by consumption of this contaminated water are
known as water borne disease. The most common waterborne diseases
with their causative organism are as given below in table 2.1.
Chemical Water Pollution

Many industries uses different chemicals end up in water. These
include chemicals like acids, bases, cations, anion, heavy metals,
pesticide etc. Out of these some are very toxic like heavy metals and
Chapter 2 Industrial Wastewater Pollution 9
Table 2.1
Common Waterborne Diseases with their Causative Organism
Disease Causative Organism

Typhoid Salmonella typhi
Dysentery Shigella dysenteriae
Chloera Vibrio Cholerae
Enteritis Clostridium perfringens, other bacteria
Amoebic Dysentery Entamoeba histolytica
Infectious Hepatitis Hepatitis Virus A
Anclystomiasis Anclyostoma sp.
Cryptospordiosis Cryptosporodium sp.
Poliomyelitis Poliovirus
Schistosomiasis Schistosoma sp.
pesticides and responsible for many disease and death of human

beings as well as aquatic plant and animals. Chemical can be grouped
into organic and inorganic.
Inorganic chemicals include acids, metals, salts etc. Contaminants
that contain elements other than carbon do not get degraded easily.
Acid base and salt affects the pH of water bodies thereby adversely
affecting growth of many aquatic flora and fauna. Heavy metals are
toxic in nature and cause many types of problem. The sources and toxic
effects of different heavy metals are discussed below in table 2.2.
Organic chemicals include man made (synthetic) and natural.
Natural organic chemicals include carbohydrate (sugar), fat (fatty
acids) and protein (amino acid). They are non toxic in nature but
may create BOD by depleting oxygen of water bodies if present in
high concentration. Synthetic organic substances include pesticides,
solvent, plastic etc. They may be toxic to human being, animals and
plants. Some of toxic effects of different chemical are discussed
below in table 2.3.
Pesticides prevents, destroy or control the pest and vectors of
diseases causing harm and responsible for loss of food and food crops
and also leads to death of plants and human being. Pesticides can be
classified into herbicides, insecticides, fungicides.
Table 2.2
Sources and toxic effects of heavy metals
Heavy Metals Source Harmful Effect

Chromium Discharge from steel, textile gastrointestinal hemorrhage,
manufacturing, electro plating hemolysis, acute renal failure,
and pulp mills; erosion of natural pulmonary fibrosis, lung
deposits etc. cancer (Soghoian and Sinert,
2008).
Copper Metal cleaning, plating baths, gastrointestinal distress, liver
pulp and paper industry, fertilizer or kidney damage.
industry, copper/ brass-plating,
corrosion of pipes and erosion of
rocks etc.
Cadmium Electroplating, paint pigments, Pneumonitis, proteinuria, lung
plastics, alloy preparation mining cancer, osteomalacia (Zhang
and silver-cadmium batteries; metal et. al., 2008).
refineries discharge; corrosion of
pipes and erosion of rocks etc.
Nickel Processing of minerals, paints, Allergic sensitization, lung
electroplating, enamelling of and nervous system damages
porcelain etc. and dermatitis (Malkoc, 2006)
Zinc Printed circuit board Dermatitis, Pneumoitis,
manufacturing, metal stomach pain, nausea,
electroplating, painting, dying, lethargy, dizziness and muscle
photography etc. incoordination (Bishnoi and
Garima, 2005).
Lead Batteries, smelting and alloying, nausea, vomiting,
paints, some types of solders etc. encephalopathy, headache,
anaxia, anemia, abdominal
pain, nephropathy, foot-drop/
wrist-drop (Soghoian and
Sinert 2009).
Mercury Old paint, industrial pollutants, Inflammation of gums and
leaded gasoline. mouth, kidney disorder,
neurotic disorder,
Parageusia, metallic taste,
pain and pink discoloration of
hands and feet (Soghoian and
Sinert, 2009).
Turbidity
Some pollutants do not easily dissolve in water and remain in sus-
pension. These materials are called suspended particulate matter.
They block the light penetration into water body thereby affecting
Chapter 2 Industrial Wastewater Pollution 11
Table 2.3
Toxic Effects of Different Chemical
Compound Health Effect

Solvent
Benzene Associated with blood disorder, leukemia.
Carbon Tetrachloride Possibly causes cancer, liver damage, may also affect
kidney.
Chloroform Possibly causes cancer.
Trichloroethylene Probably cause cancer.
Pesticide
Aldicarb Attack Nervous System
Ethylene dibromide (fumigant) Possibly causes cancer; attack liver and kidney.
DDT Carcinogenic
Organophosphate Attack nervous system
Chemicals
Polychlorinated Bibhenyl Attack liver and kidney; Possibly causes cancer.
Vinyl Chloride Causes cancer.
Dioxins Some cause cancer; may harm reproductive, immune
and nervous system.
the photosynthetic rate. It means there is less oxygen content near to

bottom of water bodies.
Oil Spillage
Oil spills effect the wildlife as it stuck into the feather of sea birds
causing them to lose their ability to fly. It also affects fishes and
aquatic organism by making a barrier for transfer of oxygen into
water bodies.
Radioactive Waste
Radioactive waste contains radionuclides like strontium, iodine,
radium, sodium, cesium, thorium, uranium etc. These are unstable
atoms or molecules which decay by emitting radiations.
Biological effects of radiations are of two types i.e. somatic and

genetic. Somatic effects are immediate radiation sickness and
acute radiation syndrome and delayed response in the form of
leukemia, carcinogenesis, foetal development abnormality and
shortening of life.
Genetic effects may be chromosomal which leads to chromo-
somal mutation leading to sterility and point mutation which affects
the gene and its changes travel from one generation to another.
Radiations are used to sterilization of food and drugs, killing of
insects in seeds and activation of chemical reactions in petroleum
process.
Source of radiations includes nuclear reactor, ventilation air, ura-
nium mining etc.
Thermal Pollution
Effluent discharge from industries like thermal power plant increases
the temperature of receiving water body to such a level that it affects
the respiration and reproduction of aquatic life. The increase in tem-
perature of water body decreases its dissolve oxygen content thereby
affecting fishes or aquatic life.
References
Bishnoi, N. R. and Garima (2005). Fungus: An-alternative for bioremediation of
heavy metal containing wastewater: A review. J. Sci. Ind. Res., 64: 93-100.
Gupta V.K., Rastogi A., Saini V.K. and Jain N. (2006). Biosorption of copper (II)
from aqueous solutions by Spirogyra species. J. Colloid. Interface. Sci. 296(1):
59-63.
Malkoc E. (2006). Ni (II) removal from aqueous solutions using cone biomass of
Thuja orientalis. J. Hazar. Mater, 137: 899-908.
Soghoian S. and Sinert R. H. (2009). Heavy metals toxicity. http://emedicine.
medscape.com/article/ 814960-overview.
Zhang W., Pang F., Huang Y., Yan P. and Lin W. (2008). Cadmium exerts toxic
effects on ovarian steroid hormone release in rats. Toxicol Lett., 182(1-
3):18–23.
Chapter 3
Analytical Methods For

P hysico-chemical properties of industrial wastewater for different

parameters are determined by using standard methods of analysis
of water and wastewater (APHA, 2005) as listed below in table 3.1.
Table 3.1
Methods of Analysis of Wastewater
Sr. No. Parameter of Wastewater Analyzed Method of Analysis
1 Colors Visual
2 Temperature Thermometric
3 pH pH meter
4 EC EC analyser
5 Alkalinity as (CaCO3) Titirimetric
6 Chloride Argentometric
7 Total solids (TS) Gravimetric
8 Total dissolved solid (TDS) Gravimetric
9 Total suspended solid (TSS) Gravimetric
10 Total volatile fatty acids (TVFA) Distillation
11 Total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN) Kjeldahl method
12 Total phosphate as (PO4) Spectrophotometer
13 BOD (Bio-chemical oxygen Demand) Azide modification
14 COD (Chemical oxygen Demand) Dichromate reflux
15 Sulphate Spectrophotomter
16 Sodium Flame Photometric
17 Pottasium Flame Photometric
pH
The pH is negative log of hydrogen ion concentration. It is measure
of hydrogen ion activity.
After calibration, the electrode is rinsed with distilled water. Take
the wastewater sample in a beaker and bring its temperature to room
temperature. Dipped the electrode in the sample and take readings
from the display in numeric value.
Total alkalinity (as CaCO3)

It is the measurement of hydroxyl ions present in the sample.
Hydroxyl ions (OH-), reacts with H2SO4 till the pH value drop
down to 4.5.
Wastewater sample is taken in a flask and two drops of phenol-
phthalein indicator are added in it. If pink colour appears, titrate it
against standardized known strength H2SO4 solution until sample
became colorless. The volume of acid used is noted as ‘A’. In same
solution add 2-3 drops of methyl orange indicator and titrate it with
standard H2SO4 until colour changes from light yellow to red. The
volume of acid used is noted as ‘B’. The total volume of H2SO4 used
in A and B determine the total alkalinity of the solution.
N × V1 × 50 × 1000
Total alkalinity (as CaCO3)(mg / L )
V2
Where, N = Normality of standardized H2SO4 (N/50)

V1 = Total volume (A+B) of H2SO4 used in mL
V2 = Volume of sample taken
Total Volatile Fatty Acids (TVFA)

Distillation method is used for determination of (TVFA). Centrifuge
200 ml wastewater sample for 10 minutes. Pour off and combine
supernatant liquors. Add 100 ml supernatant liquors in a 500 ml
distillation flask. Add 100 ml distilled water and 5 ml concentrated
sulphuric acid to it, 4 to 5 glass beads are required to prevent
Chapter 3 Analytical Methods For Industrial Wastewater 15
bumping and mix it. Connect the flask to a condenser and adapter
tube and distil at the rate of about 5 ml/min. Discard the first 15 ml
and collect exactly 150 ml distillate. Titrate it with known strength
of sodium hydroxide (NaOH) using phenolphthalein as indicator.
The end point is pink colour.
NaOH, mL × 6 × 1000
Volatile fatty acids(mg / L) =
Volume of sample × 0.7
Whereas,
Normality of NaoH is .1 N
0.7 correction factor
Solids
The amount of matter dissolved or suspended in water is termed as
total solids. Total solids are determined by evaporation of the unfil-
tered sample, whereas total dissolved solids are determined by
evaporation of the filtered sample.
Total Dissolved Solids

Clean crucible is heated to 105±20C for 1 hour in an oven and
allowed to cool and weighed after desiccation. Samples were centri-
fuge at 4000 rpm for 10 minutes. Supernatant was taken for dis-
solved solids analysis. 25 ml of the supernatant is added to the pre
weighed crucible and kept in an oven at 980C overnight. The evapo-
rated sample is then dried at 105±20C in an oven for 1 hour. The
crucible is allowed to cool in dessicator and weight is taken.
( A − B )× 1000
TDS(mg / L) =
Volume of sample, mL
Where,
A = Weight of dish and filtrate, gm,
B = Weight of dish, gm
Total Suspended Solids (TSS)

Take 25 ml well mixed sample and centrifuge it. The supernatant
may be discarded and remaining solid mixed with distilled water and
dispose in crucible. Then that crucible keeps in the oven for dry at
the 103 oC to 105 oC temperature. The crucible is allowed to cool in
dessicator and weight is taken.
( A − B )× 1000
TSS(mg / L) =
Where,
A = Weight of filter paper and solids, mg
B = Weight of filter paper, mg
Total Hardness (as CaCO3)

Wastewater is taken in titration flask. Add 2 mL ammonia buffer solu-
tion into the flask followed by 2-3 drops of EBT. The sample is titrated
with known strength EDTA till wine red colour changed to blue
M2 × V2 × 100 × 1000.
Total hardness(as CaCO3)(mg / L) =
V1
Where, M2 = Molarity of EDTA Solution

V2 = Volume of EDTA solution used (in mL)
V1 = Volume of sample taken
Sodium
It is estimated by flame emission photometric method at the wave-
length of 589 nm. The sample is sprayed onto a gas flame and
sodium ion get excited under carefully controlled and reproducible
conditions.
Prepare a blank and sodium calibration standards. Determine
emission at 589 nm on flame photometer from highest concentration
to lower concentration. Prepare a calibration curve from the sodium

standards and determine sodium concentration of sample from the
calibration curve.
Potassium
It is estimated by flame photometric method at a wavelength of
766.5 nm. Prepare a potassium calibration standard and blank from
distilled water. Determine emission intensity at 766.5 nm. Prepare a
calibration curve from the potassium standards and determine
potassium concentration of sample from the calibration curve.
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen

The presence of organic and ammonical nitrogen is an evidence of
recent organic pollution of animal origin.
In the presence of sulphuric acid and mercuric sulphate catalyst,
organically bound nitrogen gets converted into ammonium sul-
fate. Potassium sulfate is added to raise the boiling point of sul-
phuric acid from 345oC to 37oC. The liberated ammonia is
adsorbed in boric acid. The adsorbed ammonia is determined by
titration. Temperature should be kept below 382oC during diges-
tion to avoid loss of nitrogen.
Take a suitable volume of well-mixed sample in Kjeldahl flask.
Add 10 ml digestion reagent to it and placed it on hotplate to ensure
complete decomposition/destruction of organic matter. Continue
digestion, for another 30 minutes after the sample become clear.
Cool and dilute with distilled water to 150 or 300 ml depending on
the capacity of the flask.
Place the flask in its proper position in distillation apparatus and
turn on heat. Add 0.5 ml. phenolphthalein reagent followed by
sodium hydroxide- sodium thiosulphate reagent till pH rises just
above 8.3. Distil and collect 200 ml distillate in 50 ml boric acid. Use
plain boric acid for colorimetric estimation. When distillation is com-
pleted, remove the flask containing distillate first and then put off heat
to avoid backwash of solution. Titrate with known strength sulphuric
acid (H2SO4) till indicator turns a pale lavender colour. Carry a blank
through the above steps and apply necessary correction.
( A − B )× N × 14 × 1000
TKN(mg / L) =
Volume of sample
Where, A = mL 0.02 N H2SO4 required for sample

B = mL 0.02 N H2SO4 required for blank
Phosphate (PO43–)
Phosphate is estimated by spectrophotometeric method. In this
molybdophosphoric acid is produced and reduced by stannous chlo-
ride to intensely colored molybdenum blue.
Standard phosphate solutions are prepared by KH2PO4 in dis-
tilled water.
Take a known volume of standard solution and samples and add
2 ml of ammonium molybdate and 5 drops of SnCl2 solution to it.
A blue colour appeared in presence of phosphate. The spectropho-
tometer was set at 690 nm and the readings were obtained. A stand-
ard curve is prepared between PO43- concentration and absorbance.
The phosphate concentration of the sample is estimated by multiply-
ing absorbance with graph factor prepared by using standard solu-
tions of phosphate.
Sulphate
Sulphate ions are precipitated as barium sulphate crystal of uniform
size in acid medium. Light absorbed by the precipitate is measured
by spectrophotometer.
Take Na2SO4 standard sulphate solution and sample. To each
standard solution and sample add 10 ml NaCL-HCL reagent and 20
ml of glycerol-ethanol reagent. Finally volume is made to 100 ml
with distilled water. Barium chloride crystals are added to each flask
in sufficient quantity so that all the sulphate ions in the sample pre-
cipitated out. After precipitation samples are stirred on a magnetic
stirrer for about 3-5 minutes to get turbidity and then readings are
recorded at spectrophotometer at 420 nm wavelength.
The sulphate concentration of the sample is estimated by multi-
plying absorbance with graph factor prepared by using standard
solutions of sulphate.
Chloride
Chloride in water may be present due to dissolution of salt deposits,
discharge of effluents from industries, sewage discharges and irrigation
drainage. Chloride is determined by titration of water sample with
standard silver nitrate, using potassium chromate as an indicator.
( A − B )× N × 35.5 × 1000
Chloride(mg / L) =
Volume of samLpe, mL
Where, A = mL AgNO3 required for sample.

B = mL AgNO3 required for blank.
N = Normality of AgNO3.
Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD)

BOD is measure of biodegradable organic material present in waste-
water. BOD is the amount of oxygen required by the microorgan-
isms in stabilizing biodegradable organic matter under aerobic
conditions at 200 C for 5 days or 270C for 3 days.
Take the wastewater sample and aerate it with aerator. Take BOD
bottles and fill them with aerated the aerated water. Put one bottle
in BOD incubator at 200 C for 5 days or 270C for 3 days. Determine
the DO of one on same day and other bottle after incubation period
as per method given below. Difference in DO of both bottles is
BOD of the wastewater.
Take wastewater sample in 300 ml BOD bottle and add 2 ml
manganese sulphate solution followed by 2 ml alkali iodide azide
reagent. The content of bottles is mixed by inverting the bottle for
complete fixation of DO as brown colour manganese hydroxide
precipitate. Add 2 ml concentrated H2SO4 and dissolved the pre-

cipitation by gentle inversion. This solution is titrated with known
normality solution of sodium thiosulphate using starch as indicator.
End point is blue to colourless.
V × N × 8 × 1000
DO(mg / l) =
Volume of samLpe, mL
Where: V = Volume of Sodium Thiosulphate, mL

N = Normality of Sodium Thiosulphate
BOD (mg/l) = (D1 –D3) – (B1 –B3) x Dilution Factor
Where: D1 = DO of sample on 1st Day

B1 = DO of Blank on 1st Day
D3 = DO of sample on 3rd Day
B3 = DO of blank on 3rd Day
Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD)

Open reflux method is used for COD determination. The COD is
the amount of oxygen used while oxidizing the organic matter with
potassium dichromate strong chemical oxidants under acidic condi-
tions. It indicates the magnitude of biologically resistant determina-
tion in 3 hrs as compared to the 5 days required for the BOD
determination.
Sample is refluxed in a strongly acidic solution with known excess
of strong oxidising agent i.e. K2Cr2O7. After digestion, unreacted
K2Cr2O7 is titrated with ferrous ammonium sulphate.
Mercuric Sulphate (HgSO4) is added to eliminate the interfer-
ence due to chloride and silver sulphate as a catalyst to promote
oxidation of certain classes of organic compounds such as straight
chain aliphatic compounds like acetic acid, amino acid etc. Sulphuric
acid reagent is added to the sample of wastewater and mixture was
cooled down at room temperature. Then potassium dichromate
(K2Cr2O7) of known strength was added and flask is fitted to the
condenser and the assembly is placed on the COD digester. The
sample is refluxed for 2 hrs at 1500C. After that the mixture is

allowed to cool and 50 ml of distilled water is poured down the
condenser to washed it. The excess dichromate in the flask is titrated
with known normality solute of ferrous ammonium sulfate (FAS)
using 2 to 3 drops of ferroin indicator. First sharp change from blue
colour to reddish brown is the end point.
( A − B )× N × 8000
COD(mg / L) =
Where, A = Volume of FAS used for blank, mL

B = Volume of FAS used for sample, mL
N = Normality of FAS
Reference
APHA (2005). Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater, 21st
ed., Washington, DC, USA, ISBN: 0-87553-235-7.
Chapter 4
Management
D ifferent types of industries produce different types of waste

which have adverse impacts on environment. Most common
types of waste produced by industries are:
• Inorganic Salt- Ca & Mg

• Acid and Alkali - Low or high pH
• Organic matter – BOD, COD
• Suspended Solids
• Floating solids and Liquids – oil & grease
• Heated Water- High Temp.
• Colour – textile wastes
• Toxic Chemicals
• Micro – Organism
• Radioactive material – Sr90, Cs137
Industry has a moral, legal and economic responsibility to con-

sider waste treatment as one of the variable costs of doing business.
Industry must treat its waste to the level of below effluent discharge
standards limits. This can be done by adopting cheaper technology
using locally available resources.
23
Primary benefit of industrial waste treatment is in the form of sav-

ing by reuse of treated effluents by meeting compliance of regulatory
bodies like CPCB, SPCB etc. Secondary benefits are saving to
downstream consumers from improved water quality, increase in
employment in construction and operation of wastewater treatment
plant and increased recreation uses, such as fishing, boating, swim-
ming, as a result of increased purity of water. Intangible benefits of
wastewater treatment are good public relation and improved indus-
trial image, improved mental health of citizens and improved con-
servation practices (Nemrow, 2005). Main objectives of wastewater
treatment are:
• Removal of inorganic and organic suspended and dissolves

solids
• Removal of toxic chemicals and disease causing micro-
organism.
The methods of wastewater treatment are classified as physical unit

operations and chemical and biological unit processes. In unit
operation pollutant are removed by using physical forces without
any changes in their properties. Predominant physical unit opera-
tions used in treatment of wastewater are screening, flocculation,
sedimentation, floatation and filtration.
In chemical and biological unit process pollutants are removed by
converting them into non harmful end products. Chemical process
mainly changes the pollutant composition by chemical reaction of
pollutant with chemicals present in treatment system or added from
outside whereas biological agent like micro-organism convert the
organic substances in presence or absence of oxygen through enzy-
matic action. Predominant chemical processes are coagulation, pre-
cipitation, adsorption, disinfection.
Purpose of different treatment techniques is waste minimization.
Based on characteristics and amount of toxic chemicals and presence
of biodegradable and non biodegradable matter in an industrial
wastewater, the waste can be minimized by adopting techniques of
volume reduction, strength reduction, neutralization, and equalisa-
tion and proportioning.
Chapter 4 Industrial Wastewater Management 25
Waste Volume Reduction

For reduction of harmful effects on environment, the primary focus
in industry should be on waste minimization through volume reduc-
tion. After volume reduction focus should be on strength reduction.
Many industries reduce their water consumption by decreasing/
eliminating counter current washing and automation of water regu-
latory device. Effective method of reduction in volume and strength
of effluents is through change in production process. It can be
achieved by better process control, improved equipment design, use
of different or better quality raw materials, good housekeeping and
preventive maintenance (Nemerow 2007).
As the cost and scarcity of raw water supply increasing day by day
it seems logical to re-use industrial effluents. It is mainly adopted for
water supply in those areas where water is scarce resource. Industries
hesitate to reuse effluents because of technical problems like hard-
ness, colour and an aesthetic reluctance. At present advanced tech-
nologies are available which can treat wastewater to a level of
drinking water supply.
Water conservation in an industry begins with change of proc-
ess from open to a closed system. It requires complete survey and
an inventory of plant operations using water and producing waste.
Industrial waste can be separated and classified into process waste,
cooling water, sewage etc. and waste having low strength can be
used again and again without any treatment. Only a small volume
of high strength process waste is need to be treated. Cooling water
is low in strength and high in volume, thus can be reused in the
industry without any treatment. Thus by classifying the waste, the
volume of waste generated can be reduced thereby its handling and
treatment become easy. In steel mills cooling waters can be reuse
in coal washing to remove dirt and other non combustible materi-
als. Recycled concentrated wastewaters in industrial plant can be
treated in the end.
During product manufacturing some steps are repeated and sig-
nificantly increase the volume of waste. If it is discharged at frequent
interval it is known as batch/slag discharge. Affects of slag discharge
can be decreased by increasing frequency and decreasing magnitude
of batch discharge and/or holding the waste in a basin from which

waste is discharged uniformly over a long periods.
Strength Reduction
Second objective of waste minimization in industries is strength
reduction of waste and it can be done by change of process, equip-
ment modification, by product recovery, equalization and propor-
tioning of waste.
Segregating wastes result in two types of waste i.e. one strong
waste with small volume from industrial processes and other weak
waste with large volume i.e. cooling water. The small quantity proc-
ess waste have high concentration of pollutant can be treated effec-
tively depends on waste characteristics such as dye waste can be
treated effectively by using activated carbon in a separate unit. But
some time segregation is not a feasible option and waste equalization
is required. The equalization of waste water makes it homogenous in
characteristics resulting in stabilization of pH and other pollutants
in addition to dilution of pollutants. In-line and off-line equaliza-
tion basin are used in industries but in line is a better option because
it dilute the variations in influent concentration as well as quantity
as the entire flow is homogenised in storage/equalization tank.
Sometime time equalization and proportioning have been done
simultaneously. Proportioning means discharge of effluents in ratio
to flow of sewage or receiving stream. Proportioning protects stream
or sewage treatment plant by a sudden overdose and shock load of
toxic chemicals content in effluents, which may inactive or kill the
bacteria and it also minimize the fluctuations of sanitary standard in
the treated effluent.
By product recovery eliminates waste and reduces the cost of
waste treatment process and strength of waste. It can be done by
using ion-exchange or vacuumed evaporation. In metal plating
industries copper, nickel, chromium etc. can be recovered from plat-
ing solutions.
Monitoring of industrial effluents helps in detection accidental
spills and leak which are main cause of pollution. Excellent method
of reducing waste strength is by use of remote sensing device which

automatically detect the leak and spills, thus reducing and control
the flow accordingly.
Neutralization of Waste
Neutralization means adjusting the pH of the waste around 7. pH is
the negative log of hydrogen ion concentration expressed as mole of
hydrogen per litre of solution. If waste is discharged without neu-
tralization it may kill/ inactivate the microbes in biological treat-
ment systems and adversely affect the flora and fauna of the aquatic
system. It also corrodes the pipeline of water or wastewater supply.
While selecting the neutralizing reagent, the focus should be on
cost, ease of handling, safety requirement in handling of chemicals,
the quantity of sludge produced by the reagent and reaction effi-
ciency. Commonly used method of neutralization of acidic waste are
mixing of acidic and basic wastes to make it neutral, passing acid
wastes through beds of lime stones lime slurries, treatment of acidic
waste with caustic soda (NaoH) or soda ash (Na2CO3).
When wastewater is passed over the bed of lime or mixing waste
into lime or dolomite slurry, it results in formation of calcium sul-
phate (Gypsum).
CaCO3 + H2SO4  CaSO4 + H2CO3
Advantage
It is cheaper technology but cost may increase when large quantity
waste is treated.
Disadvantage
Use of lime as a neutralizing agent results in production of CaSO4
which causes to permanent hardness and evolution of CO2 gas
which causes corrosion of pipe and equipment etc.
Caustic soda neutralizes the waste at fast pace and more efficient
manner. It required in fewer amounts and no sludge is formed. It
does not produce permanent hardness but it is expensive.
2NaOH + H2SO4  Na2SO4 + 2H2O
Neutralization of alkaline waste can be carried out by passing boiler

flue gas through it or mixing or generating CO2 in alkaline waste or
mixing sulphuric acid.
Stack gas contain about 14% CO2. Neutralization of alkaline
waste with CO2 results in formation of below products.
CO2 + H2O  H2CO3
H2CO3+ 2NaOH  Na2CO3 + H2O
H2CO3 + Na2CO3  2NaH CO3 + H2O
Sulphuric acid treatment is common but expensive method of

neutralization of alkaline waste. It is difficult to handle due to
corrosiveness.
NaOH+ H2SO4  Na2SO4 + 2H2O
Removal of Suspended Solid by Sedimentation

It is the separation of suspended particles from wastewater by
gravitational settling. Most of suspended impurities have specific
gravity greater than water i.e. 1. In water supply suspended solid
remains in suspension due to turbulence. When velocity is reduced
they will settle down in sedimentation tank. Average theoretical
time of water retention in sedimentation tank is known as hydrau-
lic detention period.
Sedimentation depends on velocity of flow, viscosity of wastewa-
ter and shape, size and specific gravity of suspended particles. Rate
of sedimentation is more at lower velocity of flow and low viscosity
at higher temperature. Rounded shape large particles have higher
settling due to higher specific gravity.
Floatation
The colloidal emulsified and suspended solids are brought on surface
of water by floatation with the help of air and skimmed off. The
buoyant forces of air bubbles helps the particles of density even
higher than water to raise to the surface of floatation tank. The bub-
bles attach to the suspended and colloidal particles and the buoyant
forces of the combined particle and gas bubbles are great enough to
cause the particle to rise to the surface.
Removal of Inorganic Dissolved Solid

The concentration of inorganic substances in water is increased by
natural processes though contact of water with geological formation
containing minerals and the wastewater, treated or untreated, that is
discharge to it. Concentration of various inorganic constituents can
make it unfit for drinking and other uses. Following are the effects
of dissolve solids on water bodies
Wastewater of higher pH is difficult to treat by biological meth-
ods because it inactivate or kills the microbes. Dissolve solids can
change the pH of a water body. The pH is an important parameter
of water quality as most of microbes function in neutral range of pH
6.5 to 8. Alkalinity in wastewater is caused by hydroxides, carbonates
and bicarbonates of calcium, magnesium, sodium and potassium.
Natural source of chloride are leaching from rocks and soil and
salt water intrusion in coastal areas. Whereas man made sources are
agricultural, industrial and domestic wastewater discharged to sur-
face water.
Nitrogen and phosphorus are essential for the growth of plants
and animals as well as wastewater treatment for biological processes.
Eutrophication is caused by these nutrients in water body it present
in sufficient quantity. Therefore their removal is essential before dis-
charge into water bodies. These are essential nutrients responsible for
algal bloom in water bodies, if presents in large quantity.
Because of toxicity, heavy metals like copper, lead, cadmium,
chromium, mercury, arsenic, nickel, zinc etc. removal from the
industrial wastewater is essential. Toxic metals adversely affect ani-

mals and plants as well as microorganisms. Therefore it is essential to
take measures and control the concentration of these substances
before discharge.
Methods of Removal of dissolve solids are evaporation and vac-
uum evaporation, dialysis and electro dialysis, ion–exchange, reverse
osmosis etc.
Evaporation
Evaporation vaporizes the water and converts dissolve solids into
residues at the bottom of the vessel. Disadvantage of evaporation are
foam and scale formation.
Major factor of selection of evaporation method for removal of
dissolve solids are
• Economic value of residue should be higher than the cost.

• High initial concentration of dissolved solids.
• Dialysis
Dialysis is the diffusion of solute from higher concentration to

lower concentration through selective permeable membrane. It is
used to purify the solution of different chemicals. Textile industry
can recover caustic soda by passing effluent containing concen-
trated impure water over a selective permeable membrane. Selective
permeable membrane allows only to pass caustic soda through it.
The quantity of solute diffusion depends upon time, area of dialyz-
ing surface, mean concentration difference and temperature
(Nemerow, 2007).
Electro Dialysis
In electro dialysis, ionic components of a solution are separated
through ion selective membrane. Electric potential creates the cur-
rent to pass through the wastewater leading to migration of cations
towards negative electrode and anions towards positive electrodes
through cations and anions permeable membranes. Dissolved sol-

ids removal in electro dialysis depends upon wastewater tempera-
ture, type and amount of ions concentration, selectivity of
membrane, scale formation, flow rates and number and configura-
tion of membrane. Problems of chemical precipitation and clog-
ging of membrane can be shorted out by pre-treatment of waste by
activated carbon, chemical precipitation and some form of multi-
media filtration.
Ion Exchange
Ion exchange is the process of removal of ions by using zeolite.
Basically the process is similar to adsorption and adsorption site have
exchangeable ions such as H+, OH-, Na+, or Cl-. During this process
ions with higher charge have stronger affinity will replace the lower
charge ion. Naturally occurring materials like clay and alumina sili-
cate act as ion exchangers. Selection of ion exchange resin depends
on resin properties i.e. resin should be highly selective for one mol-
ecule and less selective for another and charge on molecules i.e.
molecules/atoms with higher charge have a greater affinity for resin
and ions with smaller hydrated radii are preferentially adsorbed. Ion
exchange process have applications in removal specific toxic ions,
removal of specific nutrients i.e. nitrate, phosphate etc., deminerali-
zation of water, recovery of costly material and water softening.
In water softening natural zeolite will exchange their sodium ions
for calcium and magnesium ions in water. Thus completely remove
the hardness. By use hydrogen cycle cations exchanger, demineraliza-
tion of water can be achieved.
Reverse Osmosis
Movement of solvent from lower concentrated solution to high con-
centrated solution through semi permeable membrane is known as
osmosis. By this process the water from the solution passed through
semi-permeable membrane and solute remain in the solution. By
applying pressure more than osmotic pressure across the membrane,
solvent is made to pass from high strength wastewater to low

strength wastewater. In this way dissolved solids can be removed by
using reverse osmosis.
Removal of Organic Dissolved Solids

Discharge of high strength organic wastewater into water bodies
results in depletion of oxygen because microorganism consumed the
dissolved oxygen to oxidize the biodegradable organic matter dis-
charge in water bodies. Biological methods are most effective for
removal of organic matter however the skilled supervision of treat-
ment process is required, as micro-organism are most sensitive to
environmental conditions like temperature, pH, dissolve oxygen
level, toxic chemical like heavy metals, pesticides and amount of
organic matter in wastewater.
Oxidation ponds are open earthen basins, specifically design
constructed by digging the soil and to treat biodegradable indus-
trial wastewaters. Wastewater is allowed to pass through it. The
microbes present in ponds degrade the biodegradable organic mat-
ter present in industrial wastewater. Detention period may vary
from few days to several days depending upon waste treatment
requirement.
Stabilization ponds may be classified as aerobic, facultative or
anaerobic depending upon the depth and mechanism of purifica-
tion. In aerobic ponds stabilization of waste is brought about by
aerobic bacteria which degrade the wastes in presence of oxygen.
Oxygen demands in such ponds are meets by natural diffusion and
algae and other photosynthetic micro-organisms by keeping the
depth of pond at about 0.5 m. The end product of the process is
CO2, NH3 and phosphate, which are required by algae to grow and
continue to produce oxygen. Stabilization of the wastes in anaerobic
pond is brought by the anaerobic bacteria in absence of oxygen and
end products are CO2, CH4 and H2S gas. The anaerobic conditions
are created by keeping the depth of pond from 2.5 to 4 m. In facul-
tative ponds, the both the aerobic and anaerobic condition were
prevailed. It’s done by keeping depth of tank in between aerobic and
anaerobic ponds i.e. 1.0 to 1.5 m. Upper portion of ponds have
aerobic condition while anaerobic condition prevail in bottom of the

pond. In between these layers facultative microbes degrade the
organic waste. The upper aerobic layer of the pond acts as a good
check the emission of foul odours from the ponds.
Activated Sludge Process

In activated sludge process a part of sludge from secondary sedimen-
tation tanks is mixed with wastewater with oxygen supply through
surface aerator, baffle walls or air diffusion in the aeration tank.
Whole content of the tank is allowed to completely mix with aera-
tion. Hydraulic retention time of detention tank is normally kept at
4 to 8 hrs. Under these condition micro-organism will oxidize the
organic matter. During degradation of biodegradable organic matter
new cells are produce generating large amount of sludge. A part of
this new activated sludge is recycled back (20 to 50%) into aeration
tank whereas the excess portion of sludge is disposed off from sec-
ondary settling tank. BOD and bacterial removal in activated sludge
treatment is about 80-95% and 90-95%, respectively. (Subramani
and Arulalan, 2012).
Trickling Filters
These are also called percolating filters or sprinkling filters consist of
tanks of coarse filtering media, over which the sewage is allowed to
sprinkles or trickles down by means of spray nozzles or rotating
distributors. The percolating sewage is collected at the bottom of the
tank through a well designed under drainage system. The purifica-
tion of sewage is brought about mainly by aerobic bacteria which
form a bacterial film around the particles of filtering media. In order
to ensure large scale growth of aerobic bacteria sufficient quantity of
oxygen is supplied by providing suitable ventilation facilities in the
body of filter.
Trickling filters are generally constructed above the ground in
rectangular or circular shape. Rectangular filters are provided with a
network of pipes having fixed nozzles, which spray the incoming
sewage into air, which then fall over the bed of filter under gravity.
The circular filter tank on other hand is provided with rotary distri-
bution having a number of distributing arms.
Coarse material like cubically broken stone or slag free from dust
of 25 to 75 mm size of depth between 2 to 3 meters is used. Filtering
may be placed in layers with coarsest stone near the bottom and finer
material towards top. Wall of filter tank are made honey combed or
otherwise provided with opening for circulation of air all through.
Properly designed under drain having adequate opening are pro-
vided under the filter bed. Vitrified clay blocks are generally used for
under drain. These blocks have top opening of such size that stone
can be placed directly on them and yet they furnished channel with
sufficient capacity.
Trickling filters can be divided into conventional trickling filter
and high rate trickling filters. High rate filters of modern advance-
ment also function on same lines as conventional system but with
difference of recirculation of waste through the filter by pumping a
part of filter effluent to primary settling tank and re-passing through
it and filter. The high rate filters make it possible to pass waste at
grater loading, thus require lesser space and less filter media.
References
Nemrow N.L. (2005). Industrial Collaborative Solutions. In: Agaedy, F.J. and
Nemrow N.L. (editors) Environmental Solutions: Elsevier Inc., Oxford, U.K.:
249-295 (ISBN: 978-0-12-088441-4).
Nemerow N. L. (2007). Industrial waste treatment. Elsevier Inc., Oxford, U.K.
Subramani T. and Arulalan K. (2012). Evaluation of the efficiency of surface aerator
in the activated sludge process treatment of food processing effluent. Int. J. of
Modern Engineering Research, 2 (4): 1518-1528.
Chapter 5
Biological Treatment of
Industrial Waste
B iological treatment systems are divided into aerobic and anaero-

bic processes. In case of most of high strength wastes neither
aerobic or nor anaerobic process of waste treatment as single unit
treat waste to the level of permissible limit for disposal of wastewater.
Initially aerobic treatment systems has been developed but due to
high cost of treatment and energy requirements and advantages like
production of methane as source of energy and less sludge produc-
tion, the anaerobic treatment system emerged as better solution in
last century because.
Biological treatment system can effectively treat the industrial as
well as municipal wastewater due to high efficiency of organic waste
removal from wastewater. They are preferred due to less operating
and maintenance cost no requirements of chemicals. The advantages
of anaerobic wastewater treatment are low sludge production and
energy saving (Korsak, 2008). The comparison of aerobic and
anaerobic treatment is as given below in table 5.1.
Different types of micro-organism works in different treatment
environment i.e. aerobic and anaerobic. Aerobic treatment means
treatment of organic waste of wastewater in presence of oxygen,
while anaerobic treatment means treatment of organic wastes of
wastewater in absence of oxygen.
35
Table 5.1
Comparison of Aerobic and Anaerobic Treatment
Parameters Aerobic Treatment Anaerobic Treatment

Effluent quality Good Moderate
Energy Inputs High Low
Organic loading rate Moderate High
Sludge production High Low
Organic removal efficiency High Moderate
Alkalinity Requirement Low High
Biogas Production No Yes
Starting time Short Long
Odor production No Yes
Aerobic Treatment
Aerobic systems includes lagoon, activated sludge processes, com-
pletely mixed system, aeration ponds, trickling filters, oxidation
ditch, rotating biological contractor and aerobic composting.
Activated Sludge Process (ASP) System

One of the oldest technology of biological treatment of organic
waste in industrial as well as municipal effluents in activated sludge
process. In this, suspended and dissolved organic solids are removed
by oxidation of organic waste by aerobes in presence of oxygen. The
oxygen concentration of the system is kept above 3 mg/L by using
surface aerator and air diffusers. The content of the aerobic tanks are
completely mixed and kept in suspension. The active sludge in the
form of mixed liquid suspended solids (MLSS) and mixed liquid
volatile suspended solid (MLVSS) is maintained in the aeration tank
by returning a part of sludge (20 to 50%) to it, that’s why, this sys-
tem is known as activated sludge process. Therefore microbe’s reten-
tion time or sludge age is very high in comparison to hydraulic
retention time. Due to high sludge age, the BOD and COD removal
were very high in this system. After biological treatment, mixed
Chapter 5 Biological Treatment of Industrial Waste 37
content of wastewater is sent to the secondary sedimentation tank or

clarifier for separation of sludge and liquid effluents. Liquid content
is discharged from the treatment system whereas sludge is disposed
off after returning a part to the aeration tank. High energy inputs are
required for aeration and mixing of content in the activated sludge
process, that’s why it requires high treatment cost.
Advantages
• Due to high sludge age high COD and BOD removal effi-
ciency.
• Due to compact size of system, low land requirement
• Due to aeration no odour problem
• Good quality effluent
Disadvantages
• High construction and operational cost

• High Sludge production
• Process is sensitive to effluent quality.
• Skilled supervision is required.
Membrane Bioreactor (MBR)

Membrane bioreactor (MBR) system is also similar to activated sludge
treatment process except sludge separation. In MBR sludge is separated
from the system by using membrane based filtration techniques.
Advantages
• Production of high-quality effluent

• Small footprint
• High MLSS means high solid retention time and higher
BOD/COD removal.
• Short HRT.
• Operate at low DO, thus simultaneous nitrification and de-
nitrification at long SRT.
Disadvantages
• High capital costs

• Need to control membrane fouling
• High energy costs
• Potential high cost of periodic membrane replacement
Trickling Filters
Trickling filters (TFs) are attached growth aerobic treatment process
for removal of bio degradable organic matter from municipal as well
as industrial effluents. In this system microbes attached to media like
pabbles or synthetic plastic balls to form a film and wastewater is
allowed to flow on the surface of this film. Generally honey comb
system is used and wastewater is allowed flow at top on the surface
of trickling filter by sprinkler or other methods. Air is introduced at
the bottom of trickling filter and when wastewater flow downward
through media having microbial films is treated by aerobes in pres-
ence of oxygen. Aeration is brought by air diffusion at the bottom or
wastewater sprinkling system.
Advantages
• Easy and simple to construct.

• Reliable technology.
• Low land requirement.
• Moderate treatment efficiency
• Low power requirement
• Effective at high organic loading rates.
• Moderate skilled supervision required.
Disadvantages
• Further treatment of wastewater is required

• Accumulation of biomass may hampers performance of
trickling filter. High biomass accumulation can be control-
led through HRT control, type of media and change in
influent quality.
• Filter clogging.
Rotating Biological Contractor (RBC)

Rotating biological contactors (RBC) are rotating disk of plastic or
other media mounted on a shaft. These disk are partially submerged
in the tank through which wastewater is allowed to flow. Disk is
rotated by a motor attached to the shaft so that microbial film devel-
oped on the media comes in contact of air and water alternatively
for degradation of biodegradable organic matter aerobically. These
can be placed in series to achieve high BOD removal and in parallel
to handle high volumetric loading rates.
Advantages
• Minimum maintenance and operation cost.

• Low energy requirement.
• High Loading rates
• Moderate BOD removal
Disadvantages
• Continuous power supply required.

• High construct cost.
• Require operator for 24 hrs monitoring
• Must be protected against sunlight, wind and rain.
• Odour problems may occur.
Anaerobic Treatment
Anaerobic treatment is generally used for wastewater having high
concentration of biodegradable organic matter. Reactor is com-
pletely closed or covered to cut air supply for creating anaerobic
condition. During anaerobic decomposition of organic waste by
anaerobes, CH4, CO2 and H2S gas is formed. Complex organic mat-
ters are first hydrolyzed and breakdown into simple molecules for
their conversion into above said end product.
Anaerobic digestion/degradation takes place in four steps i.e.
hydrolysis, acidogenesis, acetogenesis and methanogenesis.
Hydrolysis is a process in which complex substrates are broken
down to simpler molecules by the incorporation of water molecules.
During hydrolysis complex carbohydrate are converted into simpler
sugar like glucose, fat into fatty acid and protein into amino acid. In
pre-fermenters hydrolysis is catalyzed by hydrolytic enzymes excreted
by bacteria. Bacteria involve in this step are Bacteroides, Clostridium,
Eubacterium, Butyrivibrio, Lactobacilus.
In acidogenesis carbohydrates, amino acids and fatty acids are
converted into compounds like volatile fatty-acids by enzymatic
action of anaerobes. Bacteria involve in this step are Syntrophobacter
wolini, Desulfovibrio, Syntrophus buswelli, Clostridium aceti-
cum etc.
Acetogenesis is the processes of anaerobic conversion of volatile
fatty acids like butyric acid, propionic acid etc. into acetic acid
which is precursor of methane formation. The products of acedogen-
esis are acetate, hydrogen and carbon dioxide. The bacteria involved
in this step are clostridium thermoaceticum, clostridium aceticum,
acetobacterium woodii.
Methanogenesis is conversion of acetic acid into methane and
CO2 by methanogens. Aceticlastic methanogens are Methanosarcina
and Methanothrix and these are also known as Methanosaeta
(Schmidt & Ahring, 1996). About 70% methane produced by con-
version of acetate. Methanogens are sensitive to pH and these works
effectively in optimum pH range of 6.5-8.0 during anaerobic
decomposition. High acetic acid concentration during acidogenesis
reduces the pH to levels unfavourable to methanogen.
Factors Affecting Anaerobic Digestion

Stability of anaerobic decomposition depends on number of factors
like pH, temperature, nutrients, heavy metals, volatile fatty acid etc.
Acclimatization of the microbes to a substrate may take more
than 3 weeks. Properly acclimatized microbes are more resistant to
stress inducer like hydraulic overloads, temperature change, volatile
acid, ammonia concentration and environmental factors like specific
growth rate, decay rate, gas production, substrate utilization etc. The
environmental factors of significant importance listed below can
adversely affects the anaerobic decomposition of organic matter.
pH, Acidity and Alkalinity

Methanogens works efficiently at optimum pH range of 6.5-
8.5(Leitao et. al., 2006). The during anaerobic decomposition pH
stabilized in optimum range due to reaction of carbon dioxide and
fatty acid. To prevent accumulation of acid which inhibits methano-
genic activity, it is important to maintain sufficient buffering capac-
ity during anaerobic decomposition of waste which prevents the
reactor from souring.
Temperature
Biological processes are sensitive to temperature changes up to opti-
mum range and beyond optimum range a sharp decrease in micro-
bial activity is observed. Depending on temperature the anaerobic
processes can be divided into two based on microbes i.e. mesophilic
and thermophilic. Mesophilic microbes work in temperature range
of 20 to 45 0C with optimum value of 370C, while thermophilic
45 0C to 122 0C with optimum value of 550C.
Nutrients
Macro and micro nutrients are required by the microbes for their
growth and reproduction. In nutrient deficient system especially
industrial wastewater the nutrient are added to the wastewater

before their treatment. The COD/N/P ratio is an important
indicator. Trace metals like molybdenum, selenium, cobalt,
tungsten and nickel are essential for microbial growth and enzymes
production.
Methods of Anaerobic Treatment

Anaerobic Lagoon
Lagoons are earthen basin constructed upto a depth of 2.5- 3

meters. The wastewater having high concentration of biodegrada-
ble organic matter is decomposed in absence of oxygen at the bot-
tom of the lagoons. These are generally constructed where large
plots of lands are available at cheap rate. In addition to biologically
decomposition suspended solids are removed by sedimentation in
anaerobic lagoons. These are mostly used for preliminary treatment
of wastewater.
Up flow Anaerobic Sludge Blanket (UASB) Reactor
UASB is the most commonly used process for treatment of wide

range of industrial and municipal wastewater (Lettinga and
Hulshoff Pol, 1991). It was developed in Netherlands in 1979 by
Dr. Gatze Lettinga. This technique was come to India in 1989.
UASB technology is more effective in country having hot weather
(Leitao et. al., 2005) like India because it works effectively in mes-
ophillic temperature range.
UASB reactors are successful because dense granules of microbes
are formed in sludge bed at bottom of reactor which permits high
efficiency (Kaluzhnyi et. al, 2006). It gains popularity because of its
simple design, easy construction and maintenance, low operating
cost. Design of UASB consists of gas liquid solid separator with
influent inlet at the bottom and effluent outlet at top of the reactor
(Figure 5.1). When wastewater flows from bottom to top, it passes
Figure 5.1
Schematic Diagram of up Flow Anaerobic Sludge Blanket Reactor
through the dense bed of active microbial sludge which decomposes

the organic matter into methane and carbon dioxide.
The UASB reactor is typically divided into:
• The granular sludge blanket

• Three phase separator
Waste stabilization occurs as the waste passes through the sludge

bed. The high removal of organic waste in the bed is due to the
development of a highly developed granular sludge (consisting of
active biomass or bacteria), which has superior settling properties
(Lettinga et. al., 1980). Sludge bed occupy about 30% volume of
reactor and responsible for 80 to 90% waste decomposition.
The biogas provides mixing and stirring of biomass thereby
increasing decomposition of biodegradable organic matter in waste-
water. Biogas is a mixture of methane, carbon dioxide, hydrogen
sulphide and hydrogen.
Advantages
• It does not require any supporting material like stone or

other media
• Daily operation requires minimum attention
Production of valuable by product
• Requires short retention time
• No mixer or aerator is required, thus conserving energy and
operation cost
• Gas can be collected and used for other purposes
Disadvantages
• To start up the process relatively long period of time is

required
It is a primary treatment method and further treatment is
required to bring the effluent at disposal standards. It is
rather a very sensitive procedure
• It cannot remove nutrient like nitrogen and phosphate from
the wastewater.
References
Kalyushnyi S. V., Fedorovich V. V. and Lens P. (2006). Dispersed plug flow model
for upflow anaerobic sludge bed reactors with focus on granular sludge dynam-
ics. Journal Industrial Microbiology and Biotechnology, 33(3), 221-237.
Korsak, L. (2008). Anaerobic treatment of wastewater in a UASB reactor.” PhD
diss., KTH.
Leitao R.C., Silva-Filho J.A., Sanders W., Van Haandel A.C., Zeeman G. and
Lettinga G. (2005). The effect of operational conditions on the performance of
UASB reactors for domestic wastewater treatment. Water Science and
Technology, 52(1-2): 299-305.
Leitão R.C., Van Haandel A.C., Zeeman G. and Lettinga G. (2006). The effects of
operational and environmental variations on anaerobic wastewater treatment
systems: a review. Bioresource Technology, 97(9): 1105-1118.
Lettinga G.A.F.M., Van Velsen A.F.M., Hobma S.W., De Zeeuw W. and Klapwijk
A. (1980). Use of the upflow sludge blanket (USB) reactor concept for biological
wastewater treatment, especially for anaerobic treatment. Biotechnology and
bioengineering, 22(4): 699-734.
Lettinga G. and Pol L.H. (1991). UASB-process design for various types of waste-
waters. Water science and technology, 24(8):.87-107.
Schmidt J.E. and Ahring B.K. (1996). Granular sludge formation in upflow
anaerobic sludge blanket (UASB) reactors. Biotechnology and Bioengineering,
49(3): 229-246.
Chapter 6
Food Processing Industries
D ue to industrialization, urbanization, change in lifestyle and

poor water management, world facing environmental crisis of
water scarcity. When water is used for any purpose, it gets polluted.
This polluted water finds its way into water bodies, thereby further
making it unfit for others use. Polluted water adversely affects the
health of people in rural and urban area along with affects on eco-
systems. It disrupts the fundamental integrity of our life support
systems, on which a wide range of sectors from urban development
to food production and industries depends (Latif et. al., 2011).
India is world’s largest producer and consumer of food and food
products which contribute to our economy. Earlier, food processing
was mainly associated with preservation of food by salting, curdling,
drying, pickling packaging and transportation. But with time new
technologies are emerged for producing new foods which are ready
to eat food. Food processing industries like distilleries and breweries,
fruit, vegetables, meat and sea food processes, sugar manufacturing,
dairy etc. use large amount of water thereby generating huge quan-
tity of wastewater. It contains biodegradable organic matter which
creates biological oxygen demand (BOD) to receiving water body
and depletes dissolve oxygen content of it. That’s why, it is necessary
to treat this water before final disposal into environment. Primary
processing converts the raw food into safe edible products by clean-
ing, grading, sorting, packing etc. Higher value food products are
produced by involving advanced processing techniques like blend-
ing, pickling, jams and jelly.
47
Table 6.1
Food Manufacturing Processes
Products Primary Food Processes Advance Processes

Food Grain Sorting and grinding Biscuits, noodles, cakes,
namkeen etc.
Fruit and vegetable Cleaning, sorting, grinding Jam, juices, pickles, candies,
and cutting chips, etc.
Beverage Sorting, bleaching, grinding, Flavoured coffee, soft drink,
refrigeration etc. alcoholic beverages etc.
Dairy centrifuge and refrigeration Processed milk, butter and
cheese, yoghurt, ice-creams etc.
Oilseed Sorting and grinding Sunflower oil, groundnut oil,
mustard oil, soya oil, olive oil etc.
Meat and Sea Food Sorting, refrigeration, Ready to eat food
chilling etc.
Table 6.2
Value of Wastewater Produced in Food Processing Industries
Industry Range of Flow Gal/Ton Product

Fruits and Vegetables
Green beans 12,000-17,000
Peaches and pears 3,600-4,800
Other fruits and vegetables 960-8,400
Food and Beverage
Beer 2,400-3,840
Bread 480-960
Meat packing 3,600-4,800
Milk products 2,400-4,800
Whiskey 14,400-19,200
Ministry of Food Processing Industries, Government of India (http://mofpi.nic.in).
Process of manufacturing of food and volume of wastewater pro-

duced are shown in table 6.1 and 6.2, respectively.
Variation in wastewater generation is depends upon type of
industries and type of product manufactured like dairy product, salt,
sugar gelatine etc. Pollutants are mainly non toxic and organic in
Chapter 6 Food Processing Industries 49
nature creating biological oxygen demand in receiving stream.

About 50% of the waste water is originated from washing and clean-
ing and rinsing activities. As wastewater originated from food
processing industry is organic in nature, therefore, it is treated bio-
logically using both the aerobic and anaerobic processes (Vanerkar
et. al., 2013).
References
Latif M.A., Ghufran R., Wahid Z.A. and Ahmad A. (2011). Integrated application
of upflow anaerobic sludge blanket reactor for the treatment of wastewa-
ters. Water research, 45(16): 4683-4699.
Ministry of Food Processing Industries, Government of India (http://mofpi.nic.in).
Vanerkar A. P., Satyanarayan S and Satyanarayan S. (2013). Treatment of Food
Processing Industry Wastewater by a Coagulation Flocculation Process.
International Journal of Chemical and Physical Sciences, 2: 63-72.
Chapter 7
Uasb Treatment of
Wastewater of Food
Processing Industry
Manufacturing Biscuit,
Cake, Candy Etc.
F ood processing industries are those in which raw products of

agriculture, animal husbandry or fishing etc. are transformed in
a manner so that original properties changes without compromising
the quality of processed raw material and final product is edible and
has business value.
When there is considerable significant increase in self life, shelled
and ready for consumption etc., then food also comes under food
processing, even when it does not go through manufacturing proc-
esses (Nagarajan and Raghuram, 2014).
UASB Treatment of Food Industry Wastewater

Food processing industrial wastewater is treated in a UASB reactor
at different HRT and OLR. The raw effluent of the food process-
ing industry manufacturing biscuit, cake, candy etc. are analyzed
51
for physicochemical parameters by using standard method of water

and wastewater analysis (APHA, 2005) and result are given below
in table 7.1.
Table 7.1
Physico-chemical Characteristics of Wastewater of Food Processing
Industry Manufacturing Biscuit, Cake, Candy etc.
Sr. No. Parameter of Wastewater Analyzed Concentration

1 Color Dull black
2 pH 7.2
3 EC 3.00
4 Alkalinity as CaCO3 1500
5 Chloride 501
6 COD 1920
7 Total Suspended Solid (TSS) 385
8 Total Dissolved solid (TDS) 1495
9 Volatile Suspended Solid (VSS) 330
10 Volatile Fatty Acids (VFA) 600
11 Ca Hardness 160
12 Mg Hardness 73
13 Total Hardness as CaCO3 700
14 Sulphate 107.87
15 Ortho phosphate 3.61
16 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) 36.4
17 Sodium 34.4
18 Potassium 12.8
Note: All the parameters are in mg/L except pH, EC (µS/cm) and Colour
The wastewater is dull black in colour with near to neutral proc-

ess i.e. 7.2 and alkalinity of about 1500 mg/L. COD of wastewater
was 1920 mg/L having high dissolve solids i.e. 1495 mg/L. nutrients
like nitrogen, phosphorous and potassium are in sufficient quantity
in wastewater.
After properly acclimatization, the reactor was run in continuous
mode. The effects of varying OLR and HRT were studied for
Chapter 7 Uasb Treatment of Wastewater of Food Processing Industry 53
treatment of food processing waste in the UASB reactor. Based on

HRT and OLR, the study was divided into three phase i.e. phase I,
II, and III. The reactor was run at feeding rate of 3 ml/min at HRT of
19 hours and OLR of 0.86 kg/m3/day; 4 ml/min at HRT of 14 hours
and OLR of 1.15 kg/m3/day; and 5 ml/min at HRT of 11 hours and
OLR of 1.44 kg/m3/day in the phase I, II and III, respectively. The
performance of UASB reactor is given below in table 7.2.
The pH of raw food processing industrial effluent was 7.2,
Which was near to neutral thus doesn’t require any adjustment
before feeding to the UASB reactor. The pH variation of food
processing industrial wastewater after UASB treatment during
study period was in range of 7.1 to 8.4. Most of time, during the
study period, the pH was in optimum range i.e. 6.5 to 8 (Verma,
2002). It shows that the reactor was working properly and favours
the methanogenesis. The pH range from 6.5 to 8 is favourable for
the methonogenic bacteria.
Alkalinity is one of the most important factors governed by VFA
production and accumulation. Alkalinity acts as a buffer to sustain
Table 7.2
UASB Treatment of Wastewater of Food Processing Industry
Manufacturing Biscuit, Cake, Candy etc.
Sr. No. Parameters Concentration (Range)

1 pH 7.1–8.4
2 Alkalinity 300–1300
3 Volatile fatty Acid 48–720
4 Total Dissolved Solid 200–1310
5 Total Suspended Solid 25–290
6 Volatile Suspended Solid 25–245
7 Total Kjheldhal Nitrogen 8.4–58.8
8 Phosphate 1.8–5.4
9 Sulphate 57–304
11 Total Hardness 200–700
12 Chloride 50–400
13 COD 48–704
Note: All the values are in mg/l except pH
the anaerobic treatment (Bhaskar et. al., 2008). The total alkalinity of
the raw food processing industrial effluent was 1500 mg/L. The alka-
linity of the reactor was varied from 1300 mg/L to 300 mg/L which
is in optimum most of the time during the study in all the phases.
The VFA concentration of raw food processing industrial effluent
was 600 mg/L. The VFA was varied from 720 mg/L to 48 mg/L
during the food industry wastewater treatment. Husnul et. al.
(2010) have recommended the VFA level of up to 6000 mg/L which
does not inhibit the anaerobic degradation. The VFA was below this
level during study period. The decrease in VFA corresponds to the
removal of COD. The gradual decrease in VFA may be due to its
utilization by methane formers which convert it into methane and
carbon dioxide.
The TDS of raw food processing industrial effluent was
1495 mg/L which was varied from 1310 mg/L to 200 mg/L during
the treatment of food industry wastewater. There was a decrease in
TDS during study period in all the phases. With increase in OLR
and decrease in HRT, the TDS removal was decreased, as lowest
TDS removal was observed in phase III. The TSS concentration of
food processing industrial wastewater was 385 mg/L. The TSS was
varied from 290 mg/L to 25 mg/L during UASB treatment of
wastewater. The TSS removal was more or less same in all the three
phase. The VSS of raw food processing industrial effluent was 330
mg/L. The VSS concentration was decreased from 245 mg/L to 25
mg/L during the study period. More than 75 % removal of VSS was
also observed by Tawfik et. al. (2008).
The TKN of raw food processing industrial effluent was 36.4
mg/L. The TKN was varied from 58.8 mg/L to 8.4 mg/L which
indicate a decrease in TKN concentration with time during the
study period. Highest TKN reduction was observed at OLR of 1.15
kg/m3/day and HRT of 14 hrs. Higher TKN removal was also
observed by Aslan and Sekerdag (2008).
The phosphate concentration of the raw food processing indus-
trial effluent was 3.61 mg/L. The concentration of phosphate was
varied from and 5.40 mg/L to 1.8 mg/L during UASB treatment of
effluents.
The sulphate of the raw food processing industrial wastewater was
107 mg/L. Sulphate was varied from 304 mg/L to 57 mg/L during
Chapter 7 Uasb Treatment of Wastewater of Food Processing Industry 55
the food industry wastewater treatment. Sulphate concentrations of

more than 1000 mg/L have toxic effect on UASB reactor (Bal et al.
2001). During study period sulphate concentration was less than
304 mg/L, which indicate that there was no sulphate toxicity in the
reactor during study period. Sulphate reduction was increased with
increase in OLR and decrease in HRT. Higher concentration of
sulphate can cause toxicity to the methanogens and inhibit the con-
version of VFA into methane leading to decreased performance of
reactor (Gupta et al., 2007). The total hardness was varied from 700
mg/L to 200 mg/L during the treatment of food industry wastewa-
ter. The chloride content of raw food processing industrial effluent
was 501 mg/L. The chloride variations of food processing industrial
wastewater were ranged from 400 mg/L to 50 mg/L during the treat-
ment of food industry wastewater.
The COD of raw food processing industrial effluent was 1920
mg/L. An overall decrease in COD with time was observed during
the study. The COD in mg/L varied from 704 mg/L to 48 mg/L.
The results show that when the OLR was increased and HRT was
decreased, a decrease in COD reduction was observed. Similar trend
was observed by Aslan and Sekerdag (2008).
References
Aslan S. and Sekerdag N. (2008).The performance of UASB reactor treating high
strength wastewaters. Journal of Environmental Health, 70 (6): 32-36.
Bal A. S. and Dhagat N. N. (2004). Upfow anaerobic sludge blanket reactor - A
review. Ind. J. Environ Health, 43(2): 1-83.
Bhaskar, Y.V., Mohan, S.V. and Sarma, P.N., 2008. Effect of substrate loading rate
of chemical wastewater on fermentative biohydrogen production in biofilm
configured sequencing batch reactor. Bioresource technology, 99(15): 6941-
6948.
Gupta S. K., Gupta, S. K. And Singh G. (2007). Biodegradation of distillery spent
wash in anaerobic hybrid reactor. Water Research, 41:721-730.
Husnul Azan T., Faridah A. H. A. and Mohamed Hasnain I. (2010). Relationship
between Volatile Fatty Acid and Alkalinity in Anaerobic Digestion of Food
Waste, Engineering Campus, 14300 Nibong Tebal, Pulau Pinang, Malaysia.
Nagarajan C. and Raghuram G. (2014). Agribusiness Supply Chain Management.
CRC Press.
Tawfik A., Sobhey M. and Badawy M. (2008). Treatment of a combined dairy and
domestic wastewater in an up-flow anaerobic sludge blanket (UASB) reactor
followed by activated sludge (AS system). Desalination, 227(1-3): 167-177.
Verma S. (2002). Anaerobic digestion of biodegradable organics in municipal solid
wastes (Doctoral dissertation, Columbia University).
Chapter 8
Treatment of
Distillery Waste
D istillery is major source of pollution, as 88% of its raw materi-

als are converted into waste causing water pollution (Ghosh et.
al., 2003). Distillery effluents comprises of process and non-process
wastewater. Non-process wastewater is large in quantity and less pol-
luted, whereas, process wastewaters is highly polluted and need to
treated as it is having high BOD and COD in addition to colour
and high dissolved and suspended solids (Rani et.al., 2013). The
distilleries effluents contain high organic matters and nutrients
resulting in eutrophication and biological oxygen demands in water
bodies (Fitz et. al., 1998). The surface water contaminations destruct
the aquatic life and pose serious threat to soil and environmental
health (Mahimairaja and Bolan, 2004). Spent wash is reported to
inhibit seed germination, reduce soil alkalinity, cause soil manganese
deficiency and damage agricultural crops (Kannabiran and Pragasam.,
1993; Agrawal and Pandey., 1994; Pant and Adholeya, 2007).
In distillery, the water is used for washing the yeast culture tank,
fermentation tank, pre-fermenter and for diluting the molasses,
cooling and floor washing. It is known that 3-10 liters of molasses is
used for producing one liter of alcohol and in the production one
liter of alcohol, 12-16 liters of spent wash is generated (Shukhla,
1995). Because of low pH, high temperature, dark brown colour and
high organic and inorganic matter distillery spent wash is difficult to
treat and disposed off (Beltran et. al., 1999).
57
The alcohol having wide industrial applications such as pharma-

ceuticals, food, perfumery, alternate fuel etc. therefore large scale
growth in distillery has been reported. India alone, producing 3.25
billion liters of alcohol and generating 40.4 billion liters of wastewa-
ters annually from 319 distillaries (Mohan, 2009). Distilleries are
listed at the top in the “Red Category” industries by Ministry of
Environment Forests and climate change (MoEF&CC). Rapid
growth of industries and urbanization all over the world, have
resulted in pollution of water resources and cause severe problem in
collection, treatment and disposal.
Treatment of distillery effluent is a challenging task. Due to high
organic load, distillery effluents can be effectively treated by biologi-
cal methods at low cost. Over the years as the sizes and number of
distilleries have grown, therefore demand of larger treatment plants
have been increased to deal with the quantity of effluent generated.
Space and money are the biggest constraint in construction of these
plants (Fumi et. al., 1995 Pant and Adholeya, 2007).
UASB Treatment of Distillery Wastewater

High concentration of biodegradable organic matter in distillery
effluent fit for anaerobic treatment as biogas produced during
anaerobic decomposition can be used as source of energy. UASB is
one of the best technology for anaerobic treatment of distillery efflu-
ent. The physico-chemical properties of wastewater and its UASB
treatment are shown below in table 8.1.
This study was conducted to treat distillery wastewater in UASB
reactor and the efficiency of UASB reactor in term of COD
removal was also observed. The Raw effluent was collected from
the distillery and analyzed for different parameters. The UASB
reactor was run first in batch mode and after acclimatization it was
run in continuous mode at different effluent feed concentration
25%, 50% and 100% respectively and flow rate of 2 ml/minute at
constant HRT of 20 hrs. The performance of the UASB reactor
was studied in terms of removal of pollutants and results are shown
below in table 8.2.
Chapter 8 Treatment of Distillery Waste 59
Table 8.1
Characteristics of Distillery Effluent
Sr. No Parameter Concentration
1 Color Dark brown
2 Temp. 32.50 c
3 pH 3.5
4 COD 19600
5 BOD 10600
6 TS 14780
7 TDS 10980
8 TSS 3800
9 VSS 2420
10 VFA 11571.42
11 Alkalinity 620
12 Total phosphate (PO4) 11.02
13 TKN 489.7
14 Sodium(Na) 73.2
15 Potassium 273.3
16 Sulphate 216.9
Note: All the parameters are in mg/l except pH, Color and Temp.
Table 8.2
UASB Treatment of Distillery Effluent
1 pH 5.2–7.9
2 Alkalinity 1140–3820
3 Volatile fatty Acid 11862–1911
4 Total Dissolved Solid 10944–1320
5 Total Suspended Solid 736–136
6 Volatile Suspended Solid 496–88
7 Total Kjhedhal Nitrogen 1825–576
8 Phosphate 19.6–7.0
9 Sulphate 329–73
10 BOD 13000–680
11 COD 19600–1000
Note: All the parameters are in mg/l except pH.
The pH value of spent wash was 3.5, thus the pH of influent was
adjusted between 6.5 to 7.5 by adding sodium bicarbonate. The
optimum pH range require for anaerobic degradation is 6.5 to 8.5
(Saini et. al., 2016). The pH of the reactor was varied from 5.2 to
7.9. Initially pH was acidic which may be due to acidogenesis in
reactor but after initial adjustment it was become neutral to slightly
basic in nature. The pH range from 7 to 8 is favourable for the
methonogenic bacteria (Benson et. al., 2007). During the study pH
was in optimum range except for few days in starting of reactor.
Alkalinity is capacity to neutralize the acids. The total alkalinity
of the distillery wastewater was 620 mg/L. The alkalinity of the reac-
tor was varied from 1140 mg/L to 3820 mg/L during UASB treat-
ment of wastewater. The total alkalinity of the reactor shows the
regular slight increase which may be due to the pH adjustment and
methanogenic micro-organism which maintain a stable pH in the
bioreactor for optimal microbial activity. The alkalinity between
1000-5000 mg/L is recommended for anaerobic treatment (Metcalf
& Eddy et. al., 2003). The alkalinity of the reactor during the study
period was within the optimum range.
Volatile fatty acids (VFA) are those acids which readily evaporate
at normal temperatures and pressures. The VFA concentration of
spent wash was 11571 mg/L. The VFA varied from 11862mg/L to
1911mg/L during UASB treatment of distillery effluent. The pH
was decreased when OLR increased because organic compounds are
converted into volatile fatty acid (VFA) under the action of anaer-
obes in the system (Zhidong et. al., 2011). A gradual decrease in
VFA concentration was observed during the study period resulting
in rise in the pH of the reactor which may be due to utilization of
VFA by methanogens.
Presence of nitrogen in appropriate amount in wastewater is nec-
essary for its treatment through biological processes. Total nitrogen
of the UASB reactor was varied from 1825 mg/L to 207 mg/L. The
concentration of TKN was increased during study period as influent
feed concentration was increased. Mendoza et. al. (2009) also
observed the same trends.
The concentration of phosphate was varied from 19.6 mg/L to
7.0 mg/L. During UASB treatment of distillery waste a decrease in
Chapter 8 Treatment of Distillery Waste 61
phosphate content was observed with increase in OLR.

Orthophosphate is a nutrient for micro-organisms, so utilized by the
micro-organism.
Sulphate concentration was varied from 329 mg/L to 73mg/L
during the UASB treatment of distillery wastewater. The research
shows that the sulphate reduction rate was decreased with increase
in feed concentration. Since, most of the sulphur compounds were
converted into the H2S gas thus sulphate content of the reactor may
be decreased.
The BOD of spent wash was 10600 mg/L which was decreased
during UASB treatment of distillery wastewater. Decrease in BOD
indicates the breakdown of biodegradable matter into methane and
carbon-dioxide. BOD of the UASB reactor was decreased from
13000 mg/L to 680 mg/L. The result shows that there was decrease
in BOD reduction with increase in OLR.
The COD concentration of spent wash was 19600 mg/L. The
COD of the reactor was varied from 19600 mg/L to 1000 mg/L.
When the feed concentration was increased a decrease in COD
reduction was observed. The COD was decreased over time during
the UASB treatment of distillery wastewater which indicates pro-
gressive degradation of organic matter. Pattern of COD removal is
similar to that of BOD removal.
References
Agrawal C.S. and Pandey G.S. (1994). Soil pollution by spent wash discharge:
Depletion of manganese (II) and impairment of its oxidation. J. Environ. Biol.
15: 49–53.
Beltra´n F.J., Garcı´a-Araya J.F. and A´ lvarez P.M. (1999). Wine distillery waste-
water degradation. 1. Oxidative treatment using ozone and its effect on the
wastewater biodegradability. J. Agric. Food Chem., 47: 3911–3918.
Benson C.H., Barlaz M.A., Lane D.T. and Rawe J.M. (2007). Practice review of five
bioreactor/recirculation landfills. Waste Management, 27(1):13-29.
FitzGibbon F., Singh D., McMullan G. and Marchant R. (1998). The effect of
phenolic acids and molasses spent wash concentration on distillery wastewater
remediation by fungi. Process Biochemistry, 33(8): 799-803.
Fumi M.D., Parodi G.U.I.D.O., Parodi E., Silva A. and Marchetti R. (1995).
Optimisation of long-term activated-sludge treatment of winery wastewa-
ter. Bioresource technology, 52(1): 45-51.
Ghosh A.K., Singh B., Bose N. and Tiwari K.K. (2003). Biocomposting of distillery
waste to control water pollution. In OCEANS 2003 Proceedings, IEEE, 3:
1194-1198.
Kannabiran B. and Pragasam A. (1993). Effect of distillery effluent on seed germi-
nation, seedling growth and pigment content
of Bigna mungo (L.) Hepper (CVT9). Geobios,20: 108-112.
Mahimairaja S. (2004). Problems and prospects of agricultural use of distillery
spentwash in India. Magnesium, 1715: 2100.
Mahimairaja S. and Bolan N.S. (2004). Problems and prospects of agricultural use
of distillery spentwash in India. Super Soil 2004, 3rd Australian New Zealand
Soils Conference, University of Sydney, Australia.
Mendoza L., Carballa M., Sitorus B., Pieters J. and Verstraete W. (2009). Technical
and economic feasibility of gradual concentric chambers reactor for sewage treat-
ment in developing countries. Electronic Journal of Biotechnology, 12(2): 7-8.
Metcalf & Eddy, Burton, F.L., Stensel, H.D. and Tchobanoglous, G.,
2003. Wastewater engineering: treatment and reuse. McGraw Hill.
Mohana S., Acharya B.K. and Madamwar D. (2013). Bioremediation concepts for
treatment of distillery effluent. In Biotechnology for environmental manage-
ment and resource recovery. Springer India. (pp. 261-278).
Pant D. and Adholeya A. (2007). Biological approaches for treatment of distillery
wastewater: a review. Bioresource technology, 98(12): 2321-2334.
Rani K., Sridevi V., Rao R.S.V., Kumar K.V. and Harsha N. (2013). Biological
Treatment of Distillery Waste Water-An Overview. International Journal of
General Engineering and Technology, 2(4):15-24.
Saini J.K., Saini A. and Lohchab R.K. (2016). Rice mill wastewater treatment by
upflow anaerobic sludge blanket reactor. Int. J. Plant Animal and Environmental
Science, 6 (3): 128-134.
Zhidong L. (2011). A study of anaerobic digestion of excess petrochemical plant
sludge. Energy Sources, Part A: Recovery, Utilization, and Environmental
Effects, 33(10): 899-907.
Chapter 9
Treatment of Dairy Waste
I ndia is one of the largest producers of milk and milk products and
dairy has shown a remarkable development in India. Foundation
of Anand milk Union limited (AMUL) give birth to organized dairy
industry in India. The market of milk production is growing at an
accelerated pace in our country. The major Dairy Cooperative
Federation in India which are listed below:
• Andhra Pradesh Dairy Development Cooperative Federation

Limited
• Bihar State Co. Milk Producer Federation Limited
• Gujarat Co. Milk Marketing Federation Limited
• Haryana Dairy Development Co. Federation Limited
• H.P. State Co. Milk producer Federation Limited
• Karnataka State Co. Milk Producer Federation Limited
• M.P. State Co. Dairy Federation Limited
• Maharashtra Rajya Sahakari Maryadit dugdh Mahasangh
• Orissa State Co. Milk Producer Federation Limited
• Pradeshik Co. Dairy Federation Limited
• Punjab State Co. Milk Producers Federation Limited
• Rajasthan Co. Dairy Federation
• Tamil Nadu Co. Milk Production Federation Limited
• West Bengal Co. Milk Production Limited
National Dairy Development Board is the central cooperative

board of the country and was created to provide financial support to
producers owned and controlled organization mentioned above.
63
The dairy is one of the most polluting industries producing about

0.2–10 litters of effluent per litter of milk processed with an average
value of about 2.5 litters (Ramasamy et. al., 2004, Vourch et. al.,
2008, Kushwaha et. al., 2011). During milk processing, effluents are
generated by starting, equilibrating, stopping, and rinsing of the
processing units (Vourch et. al., 2008 Kushwaha et. al., 2011).
Major quantity of wastewater is produced during cleaning opera-
tions, especially between products changes (Kushwaha et. al., 2011).
Dairy wastewater is generated in periodical manner and the volume
of these waste changes significantly (Kolarski and Nyhuis, 1997).
Pollution sources of dairy industry in various operations and proc-
esses is shown in table 9.1.
Dairy wastewater have sugars, proteins, fats, and residues of addi-
tives content in it which creates biochemical oxygen demand (BOD)
ranging from 0.8 to 2.5 kilograms per metric ton of milk processed
(World Bank, 1996). The quality and quantity of effluents changes
Table 9.1
Source of Dairy Effluents During Processing of Milk
Dairy Operations and Sources of Pollution

Processes
Milk receiving station Cleaning operations and leaks and spill
Pasteurization of milk. pasteurization and heating equipments cleaning
operations, leaks and downgraded product wastage,
foaming etc.
Homogenization Leaks and cleaning operations
Milk clarification and Foaming and cleaning operations
separation
Bottled and packaged milk Overfilling, foaming, washing and cleaning operation,
leaks and damaged milk packages and sludge removal
from clarifiers/separators
Cheese Factory Using salt in cheese making, spills and leaks, cleaning
operations, overfilling and incomplete separation of
whey from curd
Butter preparation Vacreation, washing and cleaning operations
Powder making Cleaning of evaporators and driers, spills of powder
handling, bagging and stack losses
Curd Making Overfilling, washing and cleaning
Chapter 9 Treatment of Dairy Waste 65
with change in product and change in process (Janczukowicz et. al.,

2008). Dairy industry produces different products like milk, butter,
yogurt, ice-cream, and various types of desserts and cheese therefore
the effluent characteristics vary (Vidal et. al., 2000). Dairy wastewa-
ter contains milk solids, detergents, sanitizers, milk wastes, and
cleaning water (Kosseva and Webb, 2013). Dairy effluents contain
high concentrations of nutrients, organic and inorganic contents.
The key parameters of dairy effluent are
• BOD: 0.8 to 2.5 kilograms per metric ton of milk

• COD: normally 1.5 times the BOD level
• TSS: 100–1,000 mg/L
• TDS: 10-100 mg/L
• Total phosphorus:10–100 mg/L
• Total Nitrogen about 6% of the BOD level
The specific milk constituents in wastewater load are
• One kg of milk fat have about 3 kg COD

• One kg of lactose have about 1.13 kg COD
• One kg protein have about 1.36 kg COD
Waste minimization in industry include
• Product losses reduction

• Avoid use of bottles.
• Use low grade product as animal feed.
• Recycling of wastewater.
• Optimize use of water and cleaning chemicals.
• Recover energy during cooling and condensing.
• Use pressure nozzles to reduce water losses
• Avoid phosphorus based cleaning agents.
Dairy wastewater is treated by using both chemical and bio-

logical methods but biological methods of wastewater treatment
are preferred because of organic nature of waste and high chemical
cost in case of chemical treatment methods. The COD removal is
poor in physical-chemical treatment processes and huge amount of

sludge is generated, that’s why, biological process are preferred
(Vidal et. al., 2000).
UASB Treatment of Dairy Wastewater

This study was conducted to check the performance of UASB reac-
tor treating dairy wastewater at different HRT and OLR. The Raw
effluent was collected from the dairy industry and analyzed for dif-
ferent physico-chemical parameters by using standard methods of
analysis of water and wastewater (APHA, 2005). The parameters of
importance are pH, EC, chloride, alkalinity, COD, VFA, TKN,
phosphate, sulphate, hardness, TDS, TSS, VSS, sodium and potas-
sium. The UASB treatment of dairy wastewater was divided into
three phases i.e. phase I, II and III based on different HRT and
OLR. The reactor was fed on dairy effluent of 50% dilution at flow
rate of 2 mL/min, without dilution at flow rate of 3mL/min and
without dilution at 4mL/min in phase I, II and III, respectively. The
HRT was reduced and OLR was increased gradually from phase I to
III. General characteristics of dairy effluent and their UASB treat-
ment have been shown in table 9.2 and 9.3, respectively.
Table 9.2
Characteristics of Dairy Effluent
Sr. No. Parameter of Wastewater Analyzed Range(mg/L)

1 Color Pale white
2 pH 6.8
3 EC 0.75
4 Alkalinity as calcium carbonate (CaCO3) 850
5 Chloride 100
6 COD 3200
7 Total Suspended Solid (TDS) 1200
8 Total Dissolved solid (TSS) 150
9 Volatile Suspended Solid (VSS) 100
(Table 9.2 Continued)
(Table 9.2 Continued)
Sr. No. Parameter of Wastewater Analyzed Range(mg/L)

10 Volatile Fatty Acids (VFA) 4937
11 Ca Hardness 64
12 Mg Hardness 19
13 Total Hardness as CaCO3 240
14 Sulphate 115
15 Ortho phosphate 2.43
16 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) 210
17 Sodium 32.2
18 Potassium 7.8
Note: All the parameters are in mg/L except pH, EC (µS/cm) and Color.
Table 9.3
UASB Treatment of Dairy Effluents
Sr. No Parameters Concentration (Range)

1 pH 7.1 – 7.7
2 Alkalinity 1600- 550
3 Volatile fatty Acid 4646-51
4 Total Dissolved Solid 1050 – 50
5 Total Suspended Solid 250 – 25
6 Volatile Suspended Solid 300-25
7 Total Hardness 200- 20
8 Total Kjeldhal Nitrogen 230-140
9 Phosphate 4.0 - 1.5
10 Sulphate 168-45
11 COD 1820- 80
Note: All the parameters are in mg/L except pH.
The pH of raw dairy effluent was 6.8. Which was near to neutral
thus doesn’t require any adjustment before feeding to the UASB
reactor. The pH variation of dairy wastewater during UASB treat-
ment ranged from 7.1 to 7.7. The pH was in optimum range i.e 6.5
to 8 (Verma, 2002 and Saini et al., 2016) shows that the reactor is
working properly and favours the methanogenesis. Alkalinity is gov-

erned by VFA production and accumulation during anaerobic treat-
ment. Alkalinity acts as a buffer to sustain the anaerobic process as
VFA is produced during anaerobic treatment (Bhaskar et. al., 2008).
During the UASB treatment of dairy wastewater total alkalinity
varied from 1600 mg/L to 500 mg/L. The alkalinity variation
between 1000-5000 mg/L is recommended for anaerobic treatment
(Metcalf & Eddy et. al., 2003). During the UASB treatment, the
alkalinity was first increased and then decreased which may be due
to methanogens. The methanogenic micro-organism maintains a
stable pH in the bioreactor for optimal microbial activity. The vola-
tile fatty acids (VFA) were varied from 4646 mg/L to 51 during
UASB treatment of dairy wastewater. Husnul et al. 2007 have rec-
ommended that level of VFA up to 6000 mg/L does not inhibit the
anaerobic degradation and methanogenesis. The VFA was decreased
with time during UASB treatment of dairy wastewater. This decrease
was higher initially but rate of decrease was reduced with time. This
decrease in VFA corresponds to the removal of COD.
The TDS of raw dairy effluent was 1200 mg/L which during the
UASB treatment of dairy effluent was varied from 1050 mg/L to 50
mg/L. The TSS in dairy wastewater was 150 mg/L and it was
decreased from 275 mg/L to 25 mg/L during the UASB treatment.
An overall decrease in TDS and TSS was observed with time during
the treatment. When the feed concentration (OLR) was increased
and HRT was decreased, a decrease in TSS reduction was observed.
The VSS in raw dairy effluent were 100 mg/L. During UASB treat-
ment the VSS was varied from 300 mg/L to 25 mg/L. The result
shows that the removal of VSS was decreased with the decrease in
HRT and increase in OLR.
The Total hardness during UASB treatment of dairy wastewater
varied from 200 mg/L to 20 mg/L. The sodium and potassium of
the raw dairy wastewater were 32.2 mg/L and 7.8 mg/L, respec-
tively. During the UASB treatment of dairy wastewater sodium
and potassium were ranged from 32.2 to 7 mg/L and 7.4 to 2.7
mg/L, respectively.
The TKN of dairy effluent was 210 mg/L. During UASB treat-
ment of dairy wastewater TKN was varied from 230 mg/L to 140
mg/L. The results show that there was a decrease in TKN concentra-
tion with time during the study period, but this decrease was
reduced with increase in OLR and decrease in HRT.
The phosphate concentration of the untreated dairy effluent was
2.43 mg/L. The concentration of phosphate varied from 4.0 mg/L
to 1.5 during UASB treatment. The sulphate concentration of influ-
ent used in UASB reactor was 115 mg/L. Sulphate varied from 178
mg/L to 45 mg/L during UASB treatment of dairy wastewater.
Sulphate concentration was decreased with time during the study
period but this decrease was reduces with increase in OLR and
decrease in HRT. Higher concentration of sulphate can cause toxic-
ity to the methanogens and inhibit the conversion of VFA into
methane leading to decreased performance of reactor (Gupta et al.,
2007, Lohchab and Kumar, 2010).
The COD of raw dairy wastewater used in UASB treatment study
was 3200 mg/L. The COD in mg/L varied from 1820 to 80 during
the UASB treatment of dairy wastewater. The maximum COD
reduction ranged during this study was 80.9% to 94.7%. The results
showed that when the fed concentration (OLR) was increased and
HRT was decreased, a decrease in COD reduction was observed.
References
Bhaskar, Y.V., Mohan, S.V. and Sarma, P.N., 2008. Effect of substrate loading rate
of chemical wastewater on fermentative biohydrogen production in biofilm
configured sequencing batch reactor. Bioresource technology, 99(15): 6941-
6948.
Gupta S. K., Gupta S. K. And Singh G. (2007). Biodegradation of distillery spent
wash in anaerobic hybrid reactor. Water Research, 41:721-730.
Husnul Azan T., Faridah A. H. A. and Mohamed Hasnain I. (2010). Relationship
between Volatile Fatty Acid and Alkalinity in Anaerobic Digestion of Food
Waste, Engineering Campus, 14300 Nibong Tebal, Pulau Pinang, Malaysia.
Janczukowicz, W., Zieliński, M. and Dębowski, M., 2008. Biodegradability evalu-
ation of dairy effluents originated in selected sections of dairy produc-
tion. Bioresource Technology, 99(10), pp.4199-4205.
Kolarski, R. and Nyhuis, G., 1997, May. 53 THE USE OF SEQUENCING
BATCH REACTOR TECHNOLOGY FOR THE TREATMENT OF HIGH-
STRENGTH DAIRY PROCESSING WASTE. In Proceedings of the 50th

Industrial Waste Conference May 8, 9, 10, 1995 (Vol. 50, p. 485). CRC Press.
Kosseva, M. and Webb, C. eds., 2013. Food industry wastes: assessment and recu-
peration of commodities. Academic Press.
Kushwaha, J.P., Srivastava, V.C. and Mall, I.D., 2011. An overview of various tech-
nologies for the treatment of dairy wastewaters. Critical reviews in food science
and nutrition, 51(5), pp.442-452.
Lohchab, R.K. and Kumar M, (2010). Mesophilic and Thermophilic Treatment of
Distillery Wastewater A comparative Study, Environment and We: An
International Journal of Science and Technology, 5(4), 185-204
Metcalf & Eddy, Burton, F.L., Stensel, H.D. and Tchobanoglous, G.,
2003. Wastewater engineering: treatment and reuse. McGraw Hill.
Ramasamy, E.V., Gajalakshmi, S., Sanjeevi, R., Jithesh, M.N. and Abbasi, S.A.,
2004. Feasibility studies on the treatment of dairy wastewaters with upflow
anaerobic sludge blanket reactors. Bioresource Technology, 93(2), pp.209-212.
Saini J. K, Saini, A. and Lohchab, R. K (2016). Rice mill wastewater treatment by
Science Vol. 6 (3), (2016) 128-134.
Verma S. (2002). Anaerobic digestion of biodegradable organics in municipal solid
wastes (Doctoral dissertation, Columbia University).
Vidal, G., Carvalho, A., Mendez, R. and Lema, J.M., 2000. Influence of the con-
tent in fats and proteins on the anaerobic biodegradability of dairy wastewa-
ters. Bioresource Technology, 74(3), pp.231-239.
Vourch, M., Balannec, B., Chaufer, B. and Dorange, G., 2008. Treatment of dairy
industry wastewater by reverse osmosis for water reuse. Desalination, 219(1-3),
pp.190-202.
World Bank, Environmental Department. (1996). Pollution Prevention and
Abatement: Dairy Industry. Technical background document, 359-362.
Chapter 10
Treatment of Rice Mill

Wastewater
H igh organic content in rice mill effluent is major cause of water

pollution (Manogari et. al., 2008). The volume of wastewater
generation is about 900-1000 Litters/ton of paddy processed in sel-
la-rice mill (Paspia and Desikachar, 1980). The high organic content
creates biological oxygen demand in receiving water bodies thus
finally damage and deteriorate the environment (Pradhan and Sahu,
2004). Washing is done for cleaning of paddy before further process-
ing in parboiled rice mills. The wastewater is originated from par-
boiling section, boiler blow down, backwash of demineralised plant
and cleaning operation. In the dry rice grinding mills, there is no use
of water in the process and therefore there is no generation of waste-
water (CPCB, 2008).
Rice mills effluents has mainly organic matter which comes from
parboiled process. The characteristics of the rice mills effluent
revealed that apart from BOD and COD concentration which are
fairly high, the other constitutes of the wastewater have not reached
at alarming level. Presently a number of rice mills are discharging
their wastewater into streams, canals, rivers etc. In fact, the character
of the receiving stream and its capacity to receive additional pollu-
tion load are the principal considerations in determining the treat-
ment modality. Standards have been laid down in terms of
concentration of pollutants and pollution load that can be allowed
in a flowing water course. The pollution status (including pollution
71
load accepting capacity) of the receiving water course and the char-
acteristics of the industrial effluents determine the extent of treat-
ment that is needed for making wastewater suitable for disposal into
a flowing water courses. Rice mill effluent after certain degree of
treatment can be suitably disposed off into flowing water courses. A
number of parboiled rice mills have been found to be operating in
the urban sectors of the country, sewerage system exists in some of
these areas. It may be possible to discharge the liquid wastes of the
rice mills, (after necessary treatment if needed) into these wastewater
conveyance systems. Certain standards have been laid down for the
wastewater to be discharged into the community wastewater convey-
ance system. Rice mills effluent may need to be treated to a minor
extent to make it fit for disposal into such community wastewater
systems. The management may find this alternative attractive since
this will relieve them of providing an extensive treatment to their
wastewater as would otherwise be required for its disposal into in-
land surface waters. The management may have to pay a charge to
the local municipality/authority for the service they are offering in
receiving the wastewater into their common system.
UASB Treatment of Rice Mill Wastewater

After proper acclimatization in batch mode, the UASB reactor was
run in continuous mode. The UASB reactor was run on different
OLR and HRT. The efficiency in terms of COD reduction was
measured. The UASB reactor was run at different feed concentration
of rice mill wastewater i.e. 50%, 100% and 100% at HRT of 20hrs,
14 hrs and 10 hrs in phase I, II and III, respectively. In starting, the
UASB reactor was run with feeding of 50% diluted rice wastewater
and then gradually the percent sample was increased up to 100%
with decreasing HRT. The performance of the UASB reactor was
studied in terms of pH, alkalinity, COD removal, and variation in
VFA, TKN, phosphate, sulphate, TS, TDS, TSS, and VSS. The
physico-chemical properties of rice mill wastewater and performance
of UASB reactor in terms of COD reduction and variations in vari-
ous parameters at different feed concentration and HRT is as below
in table 10.1 and 10.2, respectively.
Chapter 10 Treatment of Rice Mill Wastewater 73
Table 10.1
Characteristics of Rice Mill Effluent
Sr. No. Parameter Concentration
1 Colour Yellow Brownish
2 pH 7.1
3 COD 2080
4 TS 1100
5 TDS 950
6 TSS 150
7 VSS 200
8 VFA 840
9 Alkalinity 500
10 Total Phosphate 8.56
11 Sulphate 100
12 TKN 7.9
13 Sodium 17.1
14 Potassium 5.4
Note: Except Colour and pH all values are in mg/L
Table 10.2
UASB treatment of rice mill effluent
1 pH 8.2- 6.0
2 COD 1280- 20
3 Alkalinity 1600- 300
4 Volatile fatty Acid 514- 34
6 Total Suspended Solid 350- 40
7 Volatile Suspended Solid 400-40
8 Total Kjhedhal Nitrogen 57.4- 2.4
9 Phosphate 12 – 1.0
10 Sulphate 167-28
Note: All the values are expressed in mg/l except pH
The pH value of rice mill effluent was 7.1, which was near to
neutral thus doesn’t required adjustment before feeding to the UASB
reactor. The optimum pH range required for anaerobic degradation
is 6.5 to 8.0 (Saini et. al., 2016). The pH of the reactor treating the
rice mill effluent was varied from 6.0 to 8.2. Initially, pH of UASB
reactor was slightly acidic but it gradually reached to optimum
value.
The total alkalinity of the rice-mill wastewater was 1300 mg/L.
The alkalinity of the UASB was varied from 1600- 350 mg/L. The
total alkalinity of the reactor shows the regular slight decrease with
time during treatment of rice mill effluent. This may be due to the
pH adjustment and methanogenic micro-organism which maintain
a stable pH in the bioreactor for optimal microbial activity.
The VFA concentration of rice- mill wastewater was 840 mg/L.
The VFA was varied from 514 mg/L to34 mg/L during UASB treat-
ment of rice mill effluent. The VFA variation and reduction pattern
shows same trends as COD. A gradual decrease in VFA concentra-
tion was observed during the study period. The rise in the pH in the
reactor might be due to utilization of VFA by methanogens (Foresti
et al., 2001).
TSS was varied from 350 mg/L to 40 mg/L during the UASB
treatment of the rice mill wastewater. The VSS concentration of the
rice mill wastewater was 450 mg/L. The VSS was varied from 400
mg/L to 40 mg/L. A decrease in VSS reduction was observed with
increase in OLR and decrease in HRT. The decrease in concentra-
tion of VSS may be due to process moved from acidogenic to
methanogenic stage. The VSS mainly removed from the reactor by
its conversion into methane (Ruiz et al., 1998). VSS TSS ratio
observed was decreased with time but in phase III it increased.
essary for its treatment through biological processes. Total kjeldahl
nitrogen of the reactor treating rice mill effluent was varied from
57.4 to 2.8. The result shows that the concentration of TKN was
progressively increased with increase in feed concentration. Removal
of nitrogen was decreased with increase in feed concentration and
decrease in HRT.
The concentration of phosphate was varied from 12 mg/L to 1.0
mg/L during the UASB treatment of rice mill effluent. During the
study it was observed that phosphate content was decreased with
increase in OLR. The phosphate removal in reactor may be due to
the presence of the phosphate accumulating organism (PAOs) which
Chapter 10 Treatment of Rice Mill Wastewater 75
leads to depletion in phosphate content in rice mill wastewater.

Orthophosphate work as nutrient for micro-organisms so utilized by
the micro-organism as food. The concentration of sulphate was var-
ied from 167 mg/L to 28 mg/L during the UASB treatment of the
rice mill wastewater.
The COD concentration of rice mill wastewater was 2080 mg/L.
The COD of UASB reactor treating rice mill wastewater was
decreased from 1280 to 20 mg/L. Results show that when the feed
concentration (OLR) was increased, a decrease in COD reduction
was observed (Saini et al., 2016). As well as when HRT was
decreased a decrease in COD reduction was observed. Same pattern
of COD reduction was observed by Sponza et al., (2002). The pro-
gressive decrease in organic in organic matter indicates the reactor
working effectively and efficiently.
References
CPCB, (2008) Comprehensive industry document on pulse, wheat, rice mill,
(COINDS).
Foresti E., Zaiat M. and Vallero M. (2006). Anaerobic processes as the core technol-
ogy for sustainable domestic wastewater treatment: Consolidated applications,
new trends, perspectives, and challenges. Reviews in Environmental Science and
Bio/Technology, 5(1): 3-19.
Manogari R., Daniel D. and Krastanov A. (2008). Biodegradation of rice mill efflu-
ent by immobilized Pseudomonas sp. cells. Ecol. Engg. Environ, 1: 30-35.
Paspia H.A. and Desikachar H.S.R. (1980). Modern process for parboiling of rice.
Journal of Federation Science and Technology, 18: 84-89.
Pradhan A. and Sahu S.K. (2004). Process details and effluent characteristics of a
rice mill in the Sambalpur district of Orissa. Journal of Industrial Pollution
Control, 20(1): 111-124.
Ruiz I., Soto M., Veiga M.C., Ligero P., Vega A. and Blazquez R. (1998).
Performance of and biomass characterisation in a UASB reactor treating domes-
tic waste water at ambient temperature. Water SA, 24(3): 215-222.
Saini J. K, Saini, A. and Lohchab R. K. (2016). Rice mill wastewater treatment by
Science Vol. 6 (3): 128-134.
Sponza D.T. (2002). Simultaneous granulation, biomass retainment and carbon
tetrachloride (CT) removal in an upflow anaerobic sludge blanket (UASB) reac-
tor. Process Biochemistry, 37(10): 1091-1101.
C h a p t e r 11
Treatment of
Pharmaceutical Waste
M ost of pharmaceuticals products do not have an acute toxic-

ity in the concentration ranges found in environmental
samples, but they have ability to bio-accumulate. The composition
of pharmaceutical wastewater is variable and may contain toxic
organic chemicals. A great variety of organic chemicals can be
determined among the principal component of these types of
wastewaters. Pharmaceutical drugs and substances, and antibiotics
are important compound of pharmaceutical industry that can
cause serious environmental problem. Antibiotics and other drugs
shown adverse effects on fish and other non target organism
(Kummerer, 2008). Antibiotics containing effluents are difficult to
treat with conventional biological treatment system such as aerobic
active sludge system.
The processes, which used water and generate wastewater in phar-
maceutical manufacturing, are listed below (Lahiri et. al., 2002).
1. Production of water during the chemical reaction.

2. Water generated during separation by centrifugation, decan-
tation, drying or striping.
3. Water used to purify an intermediate and final product.
4. Water discharged during separation steps in spent acid and
caustic stream.
77
5. Water or chemical used in air emission control to scrubs the

fumes of reaction vessel, storage tanks, incinerators and
other process equipment.
6. Water used to clean process equipment
UASB Treatment of Pharmaceutical Waste

UASB reactor was feed with different concentration of pharmaceutical
wastewater i.e. 10% and 50% diluted sample were prepared and used
as influent to the reactor. The reactor was operated in continuous mode
in three phases. In phase I, the reactor was feed with pharmaceutical
wastewater of 10% dilution with flow rate of 2ml/min (i.e. HRT of 24
hrs). In phase II, the feed flow rate in the reactor was increased to 3 ml/
min (i.e. HRT of 20hrs) by keeping same feed concentration as in
phase I. In phase III, a shock load of 50% dilution influents was given
and the reactor was allowed to run at flow of 3ml/min. Physico-
chemical characteristic of pharmaceutical wastewater and their UASB
treatment is shown in tables 11.1 and 11.2, respectively.
Table 11.1
Characteristics of Pharmaceutical Wastewater
S.N. Parameter Values

1 Colour Dark brown
2 pH 5.9
3 COD 10,000
4 Alkalinity 1200
5 Chloride 490
6 VFA 2675
7 Sulphate 635
8 Phosphate 35
9 TS 29500
10 TDS 23000
11 TSS 6500
12 TKN 630
Note: All the values are expressed in mg/l except pH and colour
Chapter 11 Treatment of Pharmaceutical Waste 79
Table 11.2
UASB Treatment of Pharmaceutical Wastewater

1 pH 8.1 – 5.1
2 Alkalinity 7500 – 200
3 Volatile fatty Acid 996 – 271
4 Total Dissolved Solid 18100- 1200
5 Total Suspended Solid 5500 -200
6 Volatile Suspended Solid 4700 – 400
7 Total Kjheldhal Nitrogen 730 - 310
8 Phosphate 78 – 10
9 Sulphate 508- 210
10 Chloride 1499- 208
11 COD 10560- 160
Note: All the values are expressed in mg/l except pH
Pharmaceutical wastewater is dark brown in colour with acidic pH.

Wastewater having high COD concentration and also having high
total dissolved solid. The nitrate, sulphate and phosphate content of
wastewater were 630 mg/L, 635 mg/L and 35 mg/L, respectively.
During the study period, the pH was varied from 5.1 to 8.1.
Initially the pH of reactor was acidic but with time it changes to
neutral to basic. Lower pH during the UASB treatment of pharma-
ceutical wastewater may be due to higher feed concentration.
Alkalinity is the measurement of hydroxyl ions present in the
sample. Alkalinity during study period was varied from 7500mg/L
to 200mg/L Higher alkalinity at higher loading rate was due to
increase in OLR (Mohan et al., 2005).
During UASB treatment of pharmaceutical wastewater, the VFA
was ranged from 996 mg/L to 271 mg/L. Removal of VFA at higher
OLR and lower HRT was less. The pH was decreased when OLR
increased because organic compounds are converted into volatile
fatty acid (VFA) under the action of anaerobes in the system. VFA
was gradually accumulated, which resulted in a decrease of pH and
increase in VFA content (Zhidong, 2011).

essary for its treatment through biological processes. The TKN was
ranged from 730 mg/L to 310 mg/L during the UASB treatment of
pharmaceutical wastewater. Higher level of TKN was observed at
higher feed concentration and lower HRT during the study period.
Chloride content during UASB treatment of pharmaceutical waste-
water was varied from 1499 to 208 mg/L.
Phosphate content during UASB treatment of pharmaceutical
wastewater was varied from 70 to 10 mg/L. Highest value of phos-
phate was observed at high feed concentrations and lower HRT.
During UASB treatment of pharmaceutical wastewater sulphate
was reduced from 508 to 210 mg/L. The research shows that the
sulphate reduction rate was decreased as the feed concentration
increased.
The COD of the raw pharmaceutical effluent was 10,000 mg/L.
The COD during treatment of pharmaceutical wastewater was
ranged from 10560 mg/L to 160 mg/L. The high COD reduction
indicates the proper working of the UASB reactor under favoura-
ble operating condition like optimum ph, alkalinity and VFA.
COD was decreased over the time indicating progressive degrada-
tion of organic matter (Araujo et al., 2008). Results show that
when the feed concentration was increased and HRT was decreased,
the COD reduction was also decreased. A decline in reactor per-
formance was observed after increase in OLR and decrease in
HRT. If organic loadings were too high, the COD removal would
decline (Zhidong, 2011).
References
Araujo D.J., Rocha S.M.S., Cammarota M.C., Xavier A.M.F. and Cardoso V.L.
(2008). Anaerobic treatment of wastewater from the household and personal
products industry in a hybrid bioreactor. Brazilian Journal of Chemical
Engineering, 25(3): 443-451.
Kümmerer K. (2008). Pharmaceuticals in the environment: sources, fate, effects and
risks. Springer Science & Business Media.
Lahiri S., Khan S.T., Mukkanti D., Akella V.R. and Anjaneyulu Y. (2002). Aerobic
stabilisation of pharmaceutical wastewaters using large scale extended aeration
activated sludge process. (http://www.oocities.org/saugath/1.htm)
Chapter 11 Treatment of Pharmaceutical Waste 81
Mohan S.V., Prasad K.K., Rao N.C., Bhaskar Y.V., Babu V.L., Rajagopal D. and
Sarma P.N. (2005). Biological treatment of low-biodegradable composite
chemical wastewater using upflow anaerobic sludge blanket (UASB) reactor:
process monitoring. Journal of Scientific and Industrial Research, 64: 771-777.
Saini J. K, Saini A. and Lohchab R. K. (2016). Rice mill wastewater treatment by
Science, 6 (3): 128-134.
Zhidong L. (2011). A study of anaerobic digestion of excess petrochemical plant
sludge. Energy Sources, Part A: Recovery, Utilization, and Environmental
Effects, 33(10): 899-907.
Dr Rajesh Kumar Lohchab studied M.Sc. Environmental Science
& Engineering at the Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra in 1995
and M.Tech. Environmental Science & Engineering at Guru
Jambheshwar University of Science and Technology in 1998. He has
done his Ph.D. on topic “Impact Analysis of Tourism and
Urbanization on Bhimtal lake and Its catchment” in 2008. He was
at the G.B. Pant Institute of Himalayan Environment and
Development and was awarded Research Associateship from 10th
March, 2000 to 29th June, 2001. From 1st July, 1998 to 8th March,
2000 worked as Environmental Scientist in Vogue Centre for
Environmental Management (a division of V.C.C.), Delhi.
Dr Rajesh Kumar Lohchab as a faculty member in the Department
of Environmental Science and Engineering, Guru Jambheshwar
University of Science and Technology, Hisar, Haryana, India has been
awarded and completed major research projects from AICTE of
`24,70,000/- and from UGC `10,69,800/- along with two minor
research Project awarded by UGC. He has successfully completed
83
Short Course on Biological Processes from Cranfield University,

Cranfield, UK in 2006. His interest in academics is reflected by his
active participation in several national and international conferences,
workshops, and training programs including outreach activities in
UK. He is doing his research on Pollution Management. He has pub-
lished more than 28 research papers in refereed national and interna-
tional journals of repute along with 27 research papers presentations
and invited talks in National and International Conference/
Symposium/Workshop/Training Programmes. He has also published
two books. He has guided more than 35 M.Tech. Research Dissertations
and 6 students are pursuing Ph.D under his supervision. He has
introduced courses in Industrial Pollution Management, Industrial
Health and Safety, Unit Operations and Processes, and Solid and
Hazardous Waste Management. He is a Life Member of Indian
Science Congress. He was an Organizing Secretary of International
Conference on Emerging Areas of Environmental Science and
Engineering 2017.
Jitender Kumar Saini is pursuing PhD from Department of

Environmental Science & Engineering, Guru Jambheshwar
University of Science & Technology, Hisar, Haryana (India). He
obtained his M.Sc and M.Tech in Environmental Science &
Engineering from Guru Jambheshwar University of Science &
Technology, Hisar. He has also qualified UGC NET JRF and ASRB
NET. His research specialization in water and wastewater treatment.
He is a recipient of the Basic Science Research Fellowship 2013 for
Meritorious Student in field of science. He has published 4 research
papers in International Journals. He has attended 19 National and
International conferences, seminars, symposia and workshop. He is
a member of Indian Science Congress Association.
View publication stats

Industrial Pollution Management 6 Oct

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Industrial Pollution Management 6 Oct

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

Industrial Pollution Management

Book · January 2017

Rajesh Kumar Lohchab . Jitender Kumar Saini

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Papermaking View project

impact Assessment of Rajeeev Gandhi thermal power Plant View project

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Rajesh Kumar Lohchab

Jitender Kumar Saini

First published in 2018 by

2. Industrial Wastewater Pollution 7

3. Analytical Methods For Industrial Wastewater 13

4. Industrial Wastewater Management 23

5. Biological Treatment of Industrial Waste 35

6. Food Processing Industries 47

7.  asb Treatment of Wastewater of Food Processing

8. Treatment of Distillery Waste 57

9. Treatment of Dairy Waste 63

10. Treatment of Rice Mill Wastewater 71

11. Treatment of Pharmaceutical Waste  77

About the Authors 83

T he purpose of this book is to bring together and integrate the

research paper, proceeding of conferences, symposia, handbooks and

pollution scenario suggests that a large section of people lack safe

tables, poor management of waste, loss of forest and biodiversity and

found to be more attractive due to less energy requirements, low

• Nutrients Pollution like phosphate, nitrate etc.

Decomposition of this creates anaerobic condition by depleting

Organic Matter + O2+ Aerobic microorganism → CO2 + H2O

Organic Matter + Anaerobic microorganism → CH4 + CO2 + H2S

Microbiological Disease Causing Agents

Chemical Water Pollution

Disease Causative Organism

pesticides and responsible for many disease and death of human

Heavy Metals Source Harmful Effect

Compound Health Effect

the photosynthetic rate. It means there is less oxygen content near to

Biological effects of radiations are of two types i.e. somatic and

Analytical Methods For

P hysico-chemical properties of industrial wastewater for different

Total alkalinity (as CaCO3)

Where, N = Normality of standardized H2SO4 (N/50)

Total Volatile Fatty Acids (TVFA)

Total Dissolved Solids

Total Suspended Solids (TSS)

Total Hardness (as CaCO3)

Where, M2 = Molarity of EDTA Solution

to lower concentration. Prepare a calibration curve from the sodium

Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen

Where, A = mL 0.02 N H2SO4 required for sample

Where, A = mL AgNO3 required for sample.

Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD)

precipitate. Add 2 ml concentrated H2SO4 and dissolved the pre-

Where: V = Volume of Sodium Thiosulphate, mL

BOD (mg/l) = (D1 –D3) – (B1 –B3) x Dilution Factor

Where: D1 = DO of sample on 1st Day

Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD)

sample is refluxed for 2 hrs at 1500C. After that the mixture is

Where, A = Volume of FAS used for blank, mL

D ifferent types of industries produce different types of waste

• Inorganic Salt- Ca & Mg

Industry has a moral, legal and economic responsibility to con-

Primary benefit of industrial waste treatment is in the form of sav-

2. Industrial Wastewater Pollution 7

3. Analytical Methods For Industrial Wastewater 13

4. Industrial Wastewater Management 23

5. Biological Treatment of Industrial Waste 35

6. Food Processing Industries 47

7. asb Treatment of Wastewater of Food Processing

8. Treatment of Distillery Waste 57

9. Treatment of Dairy Waste 63

10. Treatment of Rice Mill Wastewater 71

11. Treatment of Pharmaceutical Waste 77

About the Authors 83