Professional Documents
Culture Documents
net/publication/354456490
CITATIONS READS
17 825
3 authors, including:
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
All content following this page was uploaded by Sweta Parimita Bera on 16 February 2022.
DOI: 10.1002/jobm.202100259
REVIEW
1
School of Sciences, P P Savani
University, Kosamba, Surat, Gujarat, Abstract
India Over the years, conventional wastewater treatment processes have achieved to
2
Department of Biosciences, Veer some extent in treating effluents for discharge pints. Development in waste-
Narmad South Gujarat University, Surat,
Gujarat, India water treatment processes is essential to make treated wastewater reusable for
3
Department of Biotechnology, Christ industrial, agricultural, and domestic purposes. Membrane technology has
Campus, Rajkot, Gujarat, India emerged as an ideal technology for treating wastewater from different
wastewater streams. Membrane technology is one of the most up‐to‐date ad-
Correspondence
Sweta Parimita Bera, School of Sciences, vancements discovered to be successful in fundamentally lessening impurities
P P Savani University, Kosamba, Surat, to desired levels. In spite of having certain impediments, membrane bior-
Gujarat 394125, India.
Email: swetaparimitabera@gmail.com
eactors (MBRs) for biological wastewater treatment provide many advantages
over conventional treatment. This review article covers all the aspects of
membrane technology that are widely used in wastewater treatment process
such as the principle of membrane technology, the classification of membrane
technology processes in accordance to pressure, concentration, electrical and
thermal‐driven processes, its application in different industries, advantages,
disadvantages and the future prospective.
KEYWORDS
biological process, membrane bioreactor, membrane fouling, membrane technology,
wastewater treatment
Abbreviations: AEMs, anion exchange membranes; AnMBR, anaerobic membrane bioreactor; BOD, biological oxygen demand; CE, cell
entrapment; CEMs, cation exchange membranes; CNT, carbon nanotubes; COD, chemical oxygen demand; EC, electro‐coagulation; EGSB, expanded
granular sludge bed reactors; EP, electrophoresis; EPS, extracellular polymeric substances; FO‐MBR, forward osmosis membrane bioreactor; FO,
forward osmosis; GS, gas separation; HRT, hydraulic retention period; IEM, ion exchange membranes; IFAS, integrated fixed‐film activated sludge;
LM, liquid membrane; MABR, membrane‐aerated biofilm reactor; MBfR, membrane‐biofilm reactor; MBRs, membrane bioreactors; MF,
microfiltration; MBBR, moving bed bio‐film reactor; MLSS, mixed liquor suspended solids; NCs‐MBR, nanocrystals membrane bioreactor; NF,
nanofiltration; NFs‐MBR, nanofibers membrane bioreactor; NMs, nanomaterial membranes; NOM, nominal organic matter; NPs‐MBR,
nanoparticles membrane bioreactor; NSs‐MBR, nanosheets membrane bioreactor; NTs‐MBR, nanotubes membrane bioreactor; NWs‐MBR,
nanowires membrane bioreactor; OLR, organic loading rate; PAC‐UF, powdered activated carbon ultra filtration; PE, polyethylene; PODH,
polyoxadiazole‐co‐hydrazide; PTFE, polytetrafluorethylene; PVDF–HFP, polyvinylid‐enefluoride– hexafluoropropylene; PVDF–TFE, polyvinylid‐
enefluoride–tetrafluoroethylene; PVDF, polyvinyl difluoride; RO, reverse osmosis; RO‐MBR, reverse osmosis membrane bioreactor; SRT, solids
retention time; SS, suspended solids; TPI, textile processing industry; TSS, total suspended solids; UASB, upflow anaerobic sludge blanket; UF,
ultrafiltration; WWTP, waste water treatment plant.
F I G U R E 1 Schematic diagram representing the various categories of membrane used in wastewater treatment industries. The
classification is based on nature, structure, material, and surface charge of the membrane
BERA ET AL. | 3
Pressure‐driven membrane processes are most com- Nanofiltration (NF) membrane was first introduced in
monly used technology for wastewater treatment. This the late 1980s. It has properties between RO and UF
technology is used for reconcentrating the dilute solu- membrane [18]. In this process, a hydrostatic pressure is
tion based on the application of pressure to separate applied to transport a molecular mixture to the surface of
permeate and retention phases. Permeate phase has a membrane. The solvent and some low molecular
low solute content as compared to retention and feed weight solutes permeate the membrane while other
solution. The applied pressure determines the total components are retained. It is sufficient to remove ions
operational cost of the system. that greatly add to osmotic pressure and thus requires
4
|
F I G U R E 2 Schematic diagram of
microfiltration process, sourced from Singh
et al. [16]. It contains a porous membrane of size
0.1–0.2 μm. The membrane material used here
can be organic or inorganic. The technique is
used as pretreatment for microfiltration and
posttreatment for granular media filtration
F I G U R E 3 Schematic diagram of ultrafiltration process, adapted from Kazemimoghadam and Mohammadi [17]. The setup consists of a
jacketed tank and a filtration module. The membrane has the pore sizes of around 0.1 μm in dimension
F I G U R E 4 Schematic diagram of
nanofiltration process, adapted from Waite
et al. [18]. The membrane is composed of
cellulose acetate blends or polyamide
composites. A hydrostatic pressure is applied to
move the molecular mixture
lower operating pressures. Highly contaminated waters used for dairy, medicine, and wastewater treatment and
require successful pretreatment before NF, though so- desalination applications. This is also used for water
luble fractions cannot be removed by it. Free chlorine in softening and removal of by‐product from surface water
the feed water affects the membranes. NF membrane is and fresh groundwater. Membranes used for NF are
6 | BERA ET AL.
composed of cellulose acetate blends or polyamide The obvious benefit over traditional pressure‐driven
composites, or they could be modified forms of UF membrane technology is that the FO mechanism does
membranes like sulfonated polysulfone [10]. The sche- not rely on high hydraulic pressure. There by it offers an
matic diagram of NF process is presented in Figure 4. incentive to conserve electricity and membrane main-
tenance costs (low fouling potential). A FO membrane
was engineered and checked for its efficiency in desa-
2.1.4 | RO lination of water. The commercially available FO
membrane are polymerized using polyoxadiazole‐co‐
RO is a pressure‐driven procedure, used to eliminate hydrazide (PODH) and polytriazole‐co‐oxadiazole‐co‐
dissolved substances and smaller particles, is only hydrazide and is used for the filtration of reactive azo
permeable to water molecules. The pressure applied dyes from the wastewater generated from textile dyeing
to RO must be sufficient to allow water to pass the industries. The physical properties of the membrane can
osmotic pressure. The efficiency of the RO membrane be easily determined with the field emission scanning
usually benefits from higher penetrability, greater electron microscopy and atom force microscopy [15].
selectivity, and higher resistance to fouling. It is one The membrane is symmetrical with active filtration area
of the finest separation membrane processes avail- of 10 cm2 and because of its highly density and nega-
able. Here, the water is put under pressure and forced tively charged surface; the polymerized FO membrane
through a membrane that filters out the minerals and can efficiently retained high concentration of dyes. The
nitrate. RO retain mostly all molecules except water schematic diagram of FO process is shown in Figure 5.
and due to the size of the pores, the required osmotic
pressure is significantly greater than that for MF. RO
is a high‐pressure‐driven process for the desalting of 2.2 | Concentration‐driven
the salt water. Both RO and NF are fundamentally separation process
different because of the flow goes against the con-
centration gradient, because those systems use pres- The function of biological membrane system is driven by
sure to force water so that it goes from low‐pressure concentration gradient at isobaric and isothermal con-
side to side of high pressure. The drawbacks include dition. Most common example of synthetic membrane
the use of high pressure, RO membranes are costly using concentration‐driven membrane process is artifi-
compared with other membrane processes and are cial kidney. FO and dialysis come under this category,
often vulnerable to fouling. In certain situations, a where the concentration gradient becomes dominant for
high pretreatment is essential [19]. separation through membrane.
FO is a mechanism in which water is driven across a Pervaporation is used for the removal of trace elements of
semipermeable membrane from a feed solution to a volatile components present in liquid mixtures by vapor
drawing solution due to the osmotic pressure gradient. pressures through a porous/nonporous membrane. This
F I G U R E 5 The schematic diagram of forward osmosis process, adapted from Elimelech and Mi [20]. CP, conductivity probe; FR, flow
recorder; GP, gear pump; LPRO, Loeb pressure retarded osmosis; PDP, positive displacement pump; TC, temperature controller
BERA ET AL. | 7
method couples membrane permeation and evaporation, for process, fluidized ion exchange and magnetic ion
the separation of the liquid mixture on the basis of their exchange combine together. The concentration and ionic
preference. It is applied in the separation of hydrocarbons groups have helped in different applications. Removal of
(petrochemical industries), volatile organic compounds. In nominal organic matter (NOM) is effectively carried out
this technique concentration difference is the driving force. It by a nanoporous anion exchanger. IEMs can be classified
is based on a solution‐diffusion mechanism, which results in by ion's functionality and the polymer backbone [12].
the formation of vapor as it permeates. The vapor formed The foremost driving force for IEM is electrochemical
during the process is removed by either applying low pres- interaction between the molecules.
sure or by flowing inert medium in the later stage of the
process. An example of this method is the separation of the
ethanol–water mixture [12]. 2.4 | Temperature‐driven membrane
separation process
Gas separation (GS) process is also based on the same me- From many years' membrane distillation is a promising
chanism of pervaporation process. Initially sorption of feed method for desalting of seawater and treatment of waste-
takes place into the membrane followed by diffusion of water. Almost all macromolecules, colloids, volatile, non-
permeates through membrane and finally desorption of volatile substances, salts are removed by hydrophobic
permeate takes place at low‐pressure side. Selectivity is a key membranes as compared to hydrophilic membranes [21].
factor for GS process. Transport of gaseous molecule thor- This membrane filtration system helps in higher recalcitrant
ough the membrane takes place by the solution diffusion biodegradation, thus less sludge is produced and causes
mechanism. This process is specifically applicable for the lowered footprint from this process, in spite of providing
separation of gaseous mixture and polar vapors using better effluent quality. For its outstanding stability, it is
asymmetric, homogenous, or polymeric membranes. cheaper than RO‐membrane bioreactor (RO‐MBR). It has
Generally, hollow‐fiber configuration of polymeric mem- limited potential in COD removal from the feed water.
brane is used in GS. But main problem arises with the
membrane material when it is applied for the high‐
temperature application like petrochemical and petroleum 2.5 | Liquid membrane (LM)
refineries, natural gas treatment, heavy hydrocarbon
separation, and so forth [15]. In this process, a thin layer of the organic liquid acts as a
semipermeable barrier between two aqueous phases of
different compositions. Unlike other membrane pro-
2.3 | Electrical‐driven membrane cesses, LM does not require solid membranes. LM pos-
separation process sesses the attractive feature of high selectivity, single‐
stage extraction, and stripping, characteristic of none-
Electrodialysis is used for the removal of selective ionic quilibrium mass transfer. LM can be categorized as
components from an aqueous solution by applying supported LM, emulsion LM, and bulk LM. Supported
electric potential through IEMs. IEMs are made from poly- LMs consist of inert microporous support on which
meric materials with fixed ionic charge groups in the poly- organic phase can be immobilized. In an emulsion LM,
meric matrix and these are dense in nature. IEMs are an immiscible liquid layer exists between two miscible
classified into two types, which are cation exchange mem- liquids. Bulk LM employs a limited diffusion path, dis-
branes (CEMs) and anion exchange membranes (AEMs). tant from the boundary layer [22]. The main application
CEMs contain negatively charged groups in their polymer of the LM process includes separation of metal ions from
matrix, while AEMs contain positively charged groups. It is wastewater, separation, recovery, and concentration of
mostly used for the desalination of seawater, removal of acids, bioconversion, GS, and so forth. The major draw-
organic acids from food, pharmaceutical industries [10]. back associated with LM is the instability of the mem-
brane interface that may be due to the difference in
pressure and turbulence inside the LM setup. The mode
2.3.1 | Ion exchange‐membrane process of the mass transport through the membrane is by dif-
fusion. However, some other mechanisms are also re-
IEMs are semipermeable membranes in which ionic sponsible for the separation that can be defined in a
groups are attached with a polymeric backbone. In this stepwise manner. Initially, diffusion in the feed solution
8 | BERA ET AL.
across the boundary layer takes place, followed by the main set back is that it is not really effective in treatment of
sorption on the feed‐membrane interface. Thereafter, high TSS contaminated wastewater. High operation cost has
convective transport occurs in the membrane, the diffu- also limited its application [25].
sion on the receiving side across the boundary layer [3].
It is a cheaper alternative of FO‐MBR as it leads to con- Adsorption technology is mainly used for the treatment
sumption of low energy as compared to the conventional of water. Organic compounds can be removed by pow-
MBR. It shows low effectiveness for high saline wastewater dered activated carbon (PAC). Hybrid adsorption mem-
treatment in comparison to FO‐MBR process. The treatment brane process reduced the membrane fouling rate. Many
process provides stable and high‐quality product water [24]. researchers have reported the effect of particle size on
membrane fouling at a PAC‐UF system [28].
It is easy to handle system can remove colors and recalcitrant In this method, for the removal of coarse materials
such as pharmaceutical contaminants. During operation, less and microorganisms sand, packed bed materials are
sludge is generated and possesses lower fouling potential. Its used as preliminary barriers. By using granular media
BERA ET AL. | 9
filters both the membrane surface fouling and pore in wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs). Contaminated
clogging can be reduced [7]. water can be biologically treated through adequate ana-
lysis and environmental control. Small plastic carrier
material supports biofilm growth in MBBR. The perfor-
3 | MBR mance of the reactor has been shown in many coupled
operations for the elimination of BOD and nutrients. The
MBR is an updated and sophisticated weapon against key benefit of the process relative to the activated sludge
wastewater. It is a method that combines biode- reactors is its compactness and it does not involve the
gradation of pollutants by activated sludge, with di- recirculation of sludge. Flexibility is the advantage over
rect solid–liquid separation by membrane filtration, most biofilm systems [23].
that is, by means of an MF or UF membrane [21].
Wastewater treatment in MBR systems requires two
processes, namely biological processing in a sus- 3.1.2 | Anaerobic MBR (AnMBR)
pended growth bioreactor for biochemical reactions
(e.g., bio‐oxidation, nitrification, and denitrification) Two most effective anaerobic technologies in use for
and a physical membrane filtration method. Globally, wastewater treatment are upflow anaerobic sludge
MBR is being used in mitigation of both industrial and blanket (UASB) and expanded granular sludge bed
municipal wastewater. It has been reported that the reactors (EGSB). The most established AnMBR con-
annual growth rate of MBRs in the global market is figuration is where the high shear operation can
around 15%. In addition, the sieving effect of the promote higher fluxes. It is particularly suited to
membranes shorts according to the size of the con- high‐strength wastewaters (WWs) of high fouling
taminant and hold them to the membrane there by propensity. However, the energy input for such op-
brings in contact to the degrading microorganisms eration is relatively high. More recently, the im-
within the MBR for their complete degradation [22]. mersed configuration has been successfully
The widespread use of MBRs has been due to its sig- implemented, in which the biogas is used to scour the
nificant advantages such as high quality of produced membrane in the same way as air is used for an
water, high biodegradation ability of pollutants aerobic process. While the AnMBR technology offers
for a lower cumulative footprint. The schematic the key advantage of resource recovery over the
representation of MBR is shown in Figure 6. aerobic equivalent, and provides a higher treated
water quality as well as greater flexibility and opera-
tional resilience over the classical nonmembrane
3.1 | Types of MBRs process, it is nonetheless constrained by membrane
fouling, and subsequent cleaning requirements.
3.1.1 | Moving bed biofilm reactor (MBBR) Anaerobic processes in industrial wastewater treat-
ment are beneficial due to lower sludge generation
MBBR and integrated fixed‐film activated sludge (IFAS) and conversion of organic matter into useful biogas
are correlated with growth secondary biological treatment without energy consumption [30].
F I G U R E 6 The schematic
representation of membrane bioreactor,
adapted from Jefferson and Bixio [29]. The
reactor consists of a buffer tank, an aeration
tank, a membrane bioreactor tank, and a
chemical dosing tank
10 | BERA ET AL.
3.1.4 | Nanomaterials membranes MBR The processes in the pulp and paper industries are focused
(NMs‐MBR) on the use of water and an incredible amount of waste-
water can be generated. Membrane filtration makes it
The idea of NMs promises to be a sustainable route to im- possible to increase the performance of the existing was-
prove membrane characteristics and enhance the efficiency tewater treatment system in the pulp and paper industry.
of MBRs in wastewater treatment. NM‐based membranes Usually, MBR systems will extract 82%–99% of COD, ap-
are more efficient than traditional membranes in terms of proximately 100% of SS at a hydraulic retention time
hydrophilicity, surface roughness, thermal stability, (HRT) period of 0.12–2.5 days. The NF treatment process
hydraulic stability, fouling, higher water permeability, and decreased the COD and the color of the effluent by
higher selectivity due to their tiny pore size [18]. Different around 90%.
types of nanofibers MBR (NFs‐MBR) that are actively used
in wastewater treatment comprises NFs‐MBR, nanoparticles
MBR (NPs‐MBR), nanotubes MBR (NTs‐MBR), nanocrystals 4.4 | Textile industry
MBR (NCs‐MBR), nanowires MBR (NWs‐MBR), and
nanosheets MBR (NSs‐MBR). The textile processing industry (TPI) is a water‐
intensive field, as water is used as the primary medium
for the application of coloring, finishing agent, and the
4 | APPLIC ATION OF elimination of impurities. Recent trend of industrial
MEMBRAN E TEC H N OL OGY FO R wastewater treatment for energy recovery and reuse,
WASTEWATER TREATMENT the combination AnMBR and aerobic MBR method
will be a viable technique for TPI wastewater treat-
4.1 | Industrial wastewater treatment ment. The AnMBR method is used for energy recovery
and the subsequent use of aerobic MBR will accom-
The features of industrial wastewater can generally be re- plish color reduction to generate the effluent for
presented by specific parameters, including COD, BOD, SS, subsequent reuse [24].
ammonium nitrogen (NH4 + ‐N), heavy metals, pH, color,
turbidity, and biological parameters. Membrane methods
are commonly used for the handling of municipal waste- 4.5 | Tannery industries
water leading to higher costs for treated water and also
wastewater discharge. This technique helps in directly re- Tanning is a water‐consuming process and, as a result,
covering the recycled materials, by‐products, and solvents. wastewater disposal is one of the biggest issues of
It also assists in prevention of massive, high‐polluted was- tanneries. A hybrid system of low‐cost MBR minerals
tewater flows [22]. and found that the combined system could easily re-
move chromium, while the additional minerals miti-
gated fouling. The aerobic MBR is a viable technology
4.2 | Food industries for tannery wastewater treatment, however, pilot and
full‐scale implementations are minimal. More atten-
The food industry covers a diverse number of sub- tion needs to be given to the possible role of AnMBR in
sidiaries, such as fish, dairy, livestock, vegetable, and tannery wastewater treatment [25].
BERA ET AL. | 11
Membrane fouling relies on different aspects of the set 6.1.4 | Feed/biomass properties
up, that is, feed properties (pH and ion strength), mem-
brane features (roughness, hydrophobicity, etc.), and Fouling of the membrane rises with lower floc size.
processing parameters (cross‐flow rate, transmembrane Bound EPS released with rising salinity causes more
pressure, and temperature) [20]. Several of these vari- membrane fouling. Reduce in pH leads to an increase
ables combine in one form or another to intensify membrane fouling rates.
membrane fouling. Factors that can be held responsible High fouling is caused through higher MLSS. How-
for fouling are summed up below. ever, study also suggests that no or very little impact of it
on fouling. When the EPS concentration in the feed is
high, the chances of fouling increase. Increased viscosity
6.1.2 | Membrane characteristics leads to increased membrane fouling [30].
Ultrasonic mitigation
6.1.3 | Operating conditions In this system, an ultrasound‐assisted aqueous medium
is used to remove soluble and insoluble particles. It es-
Running in cross‐flow filtration mode causes less cake sentially reduces the concentration polarization and
layer formation on the membrane, resulting in lower eliminates the biofilm covering on the membrane sur-
chance of fouling of membrane. Higher aeration rates face [42].
lead to lower rates of membrane fouling. Low tempera-
tures enhance the potential for membrane fouling as Chemical cleaning
more bacterial extracellular polymeric substances (EPS) This include the use of acids, bases, oxidants, surfactants,
are released and higher the load of filamentous bacteria. and chelates, and the recent introduction of nitrite and
Higher COD/N ratio in feed lowers membrane fouling rhamnolipids acids to eliminate fouling through
BERA ET AL. | 13
solubilization and neutralization of bases which are re- fouling. Commonly used membrane modules are plate
sponsible for hydrolysis, solubilization, and saponification of and frame, spiral wound, tubular, hollow‐fiber.
the foulant [43].
Biological mitigation
It's a newer approach with high capabilities in bio- 6.2.3 | Spiral‐wound modules
fouling control. The microbial attachment or biofilm
formation inhibits through inhibition of adenosine Commercial‐scale modules contain few membrane en-
triphosphate synthesis. Enzymes (proteinase K, tryp- velopes each having area of 10–20 ft2, enclosed around
sin, subtilisin, etc.) which targets EPSs, can be used to the axial collection pipe. The typical commercial spiral
prevent initial microbial attachment than disrupt wound is 0.66 ft diameter and 3.33 ft long. The pressure
established biofilm. The protease is much better than drop is reduced by multienvelope designs in which
traditional chemicals for the control of irreversible permeate travels through central pipe [4].
membrane in spite of drawbacks (instability, tem-
perature, and pH) [46].
6.2.4 | Hollow‐fiber modules
Electrically based mitigation
Electrophoresis (EP) and electrostatic repulsion, and the Usually hollow‐fiber modules are 10–20 cm in diameter and
forces exerted by electric fields on the charged particles of height ranging 3–5 ft. They are mostly operated with the
can inhibit membrane fouling by electrical methods. It is feed stream on the exterior of the fiber. Water traverses into
used to control fouling in MBRs, mainly external such as the lumen of the fiber inside the membrane. Large number
electro‐coagulation (EC) and EP or internal such as mi- of fibers are composed together and "potted" in an epoxy
crobial fuel cells (MFCs). resin at two ends and placed into an outer shell [47].
To achieve the required separation, industrial membrane Membrane technology is dramatically improving the man-
plants require hundreds to thousands of square meters of agement of water and wastewater. It shows extensive ap-
membrane. There are many ways of economic mem- plications and observed as a very beneficial method for
brane packages to provide huge surface area for effective wastewater treatment [48]. New researchers are being car-
and efficient separation [7]. Usually, the designs of ried out till date for application and development of new,
membrane module are used for prevention of membrane more efficient membrane materials, copolymers like
14 | BERA ET AL.
[26] Koc‐Jurczyk J. Removal of refractory pollutants from landfill [40] Vrouwenvelder JS, van Paassen JAM, Wessels LP,
leachate using two‐phase system. Water Environ Res. 2014; van Dam AF, Bakker SM. The membrane fouling simu-
86:74–80. lator: a practical tool for fouling prediction and control.
[27] Pavithra KG, Sentil Kumar P, Jaikumar V, Sundar, Rajan P. J Membr Sci. 2006;281:316–24.
Removal of colorants from wastewater: a review on sources [41] Iorhemen OT, Hamza RA, Tay JH. Membrane fouling control
and treatment strategies. J Ind Eng Chem. 2019;75:1–19. in membrane bioreactors (MBRs) using granular materials.
[28] Zoubeik M, Ismail M, Salama A, Henni A. New developments Bioresour Technol. 2017;240:9–24.
in membrane technologies used in the treatment of produced [42] Peng N, Widjojo N, Sukitpaneenit P, Teoh MM,
water: a review. Arabian J Sci Eng. 2018;43:2093–2118. Lipscomb GG, Chung TS, et al. Evolution of polymeric hol-
[29] Jefferson B, Bixio D. Membrane bioreactor technology for low fibers as sustainable technologies: past, present, and fu-
wastewater treatment and reuse. Desalination. 2006;187:271–82. ture. Prog Polym Sci. 2012;37:1401–24.
[30] Chang IS, Le Clech P, Jefferson B, Judd S. Membrane fouling [43] Mishima I, Nakajima J. Control of membrane fouling in
in membrane bioreactors for wastewater treatment. membrane bioreactor process by coagulant addition. Water
J Environ Eng. 2002;128:1018–29. Sci Technol. 2009;59:1255–62.
[31] Valladares Linares R, Fortunato L, Farhat NM, Bucs SS, [44] Bagheri M, Akbari A, Mirbagheri SA. Advanced control of
Staal M, Fridjonsson EO, et al. Desalination and water membrane fouling in filtration systems using artificial in-
treatment mini‐review: novel non‐destructive in situ biofilm telligence and machine learning techniques: a critical review.
characterization techniques in membrane systems. Taylor Process Saf Environ Prot. 2019;123:229–52.
Fr. 2016;57:22894–901. [45] Ahmad A, Mohd‐Setapar SH, Chuong CS, Khatoon A,
[32] Babuponnusami A, Muthukumar K. A review on Fenton and Wani WA, Kumar R, et al. Recent advances in new gen-
improvements to the fenton process for wastewater treat- eration dye removal technologies: novel search for ap-
ment. J Environ Chem Eng. 2014;2:557–72. proaches to reprocess wastewater. RSC Adv. 2015;5:
[33] Gao W, Liang H, Ma J, Han M, Chen Z, Han Z, et al. Membrane 30801–18.
fouling control in ultrafiltration technology for drinking water [46] Kimura K, Oki Y. Efficient control of membrane fouling in
production: a review. Desalination. 2011;272:1–8. MF by removal of biopolymers: comparison of various pre-
[34] Qu F, Liang H, Zhou J, Nan J, Shao S, Zhang J, et al. Ul- treatments. Water Res. 2017;115:172–9.
trafiltration membrane fouling caused by extracellular or- [47] Togo N, Nakagawa K, Shintani T, Yoshioka T, Takahashi T,
ganic matter (EOM) from Microcystis aeruginosa: effects of Kamio E, et al. Osmotically assisted reverse osmosis utilizing
membrane pore size and surface hydrophobicity. J Membr hollow fiber membrane module for concentration process.
Sci. 2014;449:58–66. ACS Publ. 2019;58:6721–9.
[35] Wang N, Li X, Yang Y, Zhou Z, Shang Y, Zhuang X. [48] Mbakop S, Nthunya LN, Onyango MS. Recent advances in
Photocatalysis‐coagulation to control ultrafiltration mem- the synthesis of nanocellulose functionalized–hybrid mem-
brane fouling caused by natural organic matter. J Clean Prod. branes and application in water quality improvement.
2020;265:121790. Processes. 2021;9:611.
[36] Wang H, Park M, Liang H, Wu S, Lopez IJ, Ji W, et al. Re- [49] Bouhid de Aguiar I, Schroën K. Microfluidics used as a tool
ducing ultrafiltration membrane fouling during potable wa- to understand and optimize membrane filtration processes.
ter reuse using pre‐ozonation. Water Res. 2017;125:42–51. Membranes. 2020;10:316.
[37] Liao Y, Bokhary A, Maleki E, Liao B. A review of membrane
fouling and its control in algal‐related membrane processes.
Bioresour Technol. 2018;264:343–58.
[38] Liu T, Drews A. Membrane fouling in membrane bioreactors ‐ How to cite this article: Bera SP, Godhaniya M,
characterisation, contradictions, cause and cures. J Membr Sci. Kothari C. Emerging and advanced membrane
2010;363:1–28. technology for wastewater treatment: a review.
[39] Hilal N, Ogunbiyi OO, Miles NJ, Nigmatullin R. Methods J Basic Microbiol. 2021;1–15.
employed for control of fouling in MF and UF membranes: a https://doi.org/10.1002/jobm.202100259
comprehensive review. Sep Sci Technol. 2005;40:1957–2005.