DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.14967818
title: Dataset Supporting Deliverable 1.5 - New approaches and best practices for closing the material cycles within symbiosis cluster

description: Dataset containing the data the support the experimental findings described in ULTIMATE delivarable 1.5.

This deliverable is available on Zenodo under https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14967803 

In concerns the following:

Case Study 3 (Rosignano, Italy) - Use of by-products of local industries for wastewater treatment in Rosignano

Table 3.1. Design parameters of the adsorption columns.

Figure 3.1. Dose curve of the AOP Pilot Plant

Table 3.2. Hardness and COD removal during laboratory tests.

Figure 3.2 Conductivity values in the inlet and outlet streams

Figure 3.3 pH values in the inlet and outlet streams.

Figure 3.4 Alkalinity values in the inlet and outlet streams.

Figure 3.5 CO3- concentration values in the inlet and outlet streams.

Figure 3.6 HCO3- concentration values in the inlet and outlet streams.

Figure 3.7 OH- concentration values in the inlet and outlet streams.

Figure 3.8 Temporary and permanent hardness removal

Figure 3.9 Hardness removal efficiency.

Table 3.3. Results of Jar Test experiments using coagulant solution recovered from aluminium sludge

Table 3.4. General characteristics of the activated carbon used

Figure 3.10 Breakthrough curve of UV254 and fluorescence signal from real-time sensors during adsorption Test 1.

Figure 3.11 Breakthrough curve of UV254 and fluorescence signal from real-time sensors during adsorption Test 2.

Figure 3.12 Breakthrough curve of carbamazepine and primidone during the two adsorption experimental tests

Table 3.5. Observed correlation between spectroscopic sensors’ signals and monitored emerging contaminants

Figure 3.13 Observed correlation between sulfamethoxazole and fluorescence during adsorption Test 2. C0 and F0 are observed concentration of the contaminant and fluorescence signal in the influent, respectively

Figure 3.14 Fluorescence spectra of the wastewater influent to the AOP pilot plant collected at different days

Figure 3.15 Fluorescence signal of the influent and effluent of the AOP pilot plant recorded in real-time

Figure 3.16 Observed concentrations of primidone and clarithromycin in the influent (blu indicator) and effluent (orange indicator) of the AOP pilot plant

Figure 3.17 Correlation analysis between fluorescence removal and emerging contaminants removal during AOP process

Table 3.6. Observed correlations between removal of fluorescence signal and organic micropollutants during AOP process

 

Case Study 6 (Karmiel, Israel) - Recovery of high-value products from olive mill wastewater

 

Figure 6.1 Polyphenols concentration of the raw OMW and the OMW after the different adsorption runs

Figure 6.2 The reuse of methanol for extracting the adsorbed polyphenols on the resin for six successive runs. 

Figure 6.3 (A) corresponds to the system with 2.5% of OMW mixed with synthetic wastewater, and on (B) corresponds to 2.5% of treated OMW by the resin bed. 

Figure 6.4 a) the effect of extraction of polyphenol from OMW othe methane yield of the the mixed OMW with domestic WW. (b) the effect of polyphenol extraction on its removal by the anaerobic biodegradation.  

Figure 6.5 Total COD of in and out of the AAT as a result of the extraction process of polyphenol by the resin. 

Figure 6.6 Soluble COD of in and out of the AAT as a result of the extraction process of polyphenol by the resin.

Figure 6.7 The effect of polyphenol extraction on the removal of polyphenol after the anaerobic (AAT) treatment

Figure 6.8 The effect of polyphenol extraction on the biogas rate 

Figure 6.9 The effect of polyphenol extraction on the average biogas production rate.  

 

Case Study 7 (Tain, UK) - Recovery of nutrients from distillery wastewater after AnMBR treatment in Tain

Figure 7.1 Examples of X-ray diffraction spectra of the products recovered at pHs of (a) 7.4, (b) 7.7, (c) 8.1 and (d) 8.9. 

Table 7.1 Metals and COD content of the products recovered at different pHs as % mass.

Figure 7.2 Impact of pH on the performance of the ammonia stripping unit.

Figure 7.3 Impact of N/metal ratio on ammonia stripping efficiency (lab-scale trials with synthetic solutions)

Figure 7.4 Evolution of the ammonia concentration over time for an example of a single batch of the acid solution in the scrubber.

 

Case Study 8 (Roussillon, France) - Recovery of sulphur at the Chemical Platform Roussillon

Table 8.1: Testing conditions

Table 8.2: Typical ranges for operating parameters during the pilot tests

Figure 8.1: Results obtained in the evolution of SO2 content between each operation unit of the pilot

Table 8.3: Best results obtained in the pilot.

Figure 8.2: Evolution of metals in the NaHSO3 solution

Figure 8.3: Evolution of halogens in the NaHSO3 solution

Figure 8.4: Adsorption efficiency obtained during lab tests at different temperatures

Figure 8.5: Adsorption efficiency of the pilot at different pH

Figure 8.5: Adsorption yield results of the pilot modelling, comparison with experimental results

 

Case Study 8 (Roussillon, France) - Recovery of metals

Table 8.4: description of the ion exchange resins tested

Figure 8.6: Results on 10-fold diluted effluent for resin A

Table 8.5: Results on 10-fold diluted effluent for resin A

Figure 8.7: Comparison of results for a 10-fold and 5-fold diluted effluent for resin A

Table 8.6: Results on 5-fold diluted effluent for resin A

Figure 8.8: Comparison of results for 10-, 5- and 3-fold diluted effluent for resin A

Figure 8.9: Comparison of results on resin A with and without preconditioning

Table 8.7: Results with and without conditioning for resin A

Figure 8.10: Influence of the resin A quantity / effluent quantity ratio on molybdenum absorption efficiency for 3-fold diluted effluent

Figure 8.11: Comparison of results obtained on different resins

Table 8.8: Results of elution lab tests

Table 8.9: Results of lifetime lab tests

 

Case Study 9 (Kalundborg, Denmark) - I2.9. Concept study for nutrient and/or high-value product recovery in Kalund

Table 9.1: No. of samples, mean, median, min, max and variance of various parameters in the concentrate of the NF-RO scheme in CS9 measured by the iWWTP

Table 9.2: Influent loads within the iWWTP (industrial waste water treatment plant), the conc. (concentrate under study), ratio of concentrate in total load, potential recovery rate in concentrate and related to iWWTP influent