0
Article ? AI-assigned paper type based on the abstract. Classification may not be perfect — flag errors using the feedback button. Tier 2 ? Original research — experimental, observational, or case-control study. Direct primary evidence. Environmental Sources Policy & Risk Remediation Sign in to save

Feasibility of rapid gravity filtration and membrane ultrafiltration for the removal of microplastics and microlitter in sewage and wastewater from plastic industry

Journal of Water Process Engineering 2022 59 citations ? Citation count from OpenAlex, updated daily. May differ slightly from the publisher's own count.
J. González-Camejo, Ana Rita Morales, Javier Peña-Lamas, C. Lafita, S. Enguídanos, A. Seco, N. Martí

Summary

Rapid gravity filtration and membrane ultrafiltration were evaluated as tertiary treatment options for removing microplastics and microlitter from wastewater treatment plant effluent, finding both methods reduced particle concentrations significantly. The results support adding these polishing steps to existing plants to reduce microplastic emissions to the environment.

Study Type Environmental

Wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) act as barriers in reducing uncontrolled microplastic and microlitter (MP-ML) emissions from both urban and industrial wastewaters. Despite removing most of the MP-ML, large quantities of this waste still enter the environment through WWTP effluents, which means further post-treatment technologies are needed. This study contains a technical evaluation of MP-ML removal from urban wastewater (UWW) and from the wastewater from the recycling plastic industry (PIWW) using two different pilot-scale post-treatment systems: rapid gravity filtration (RGF) and ultrafiltration (UF) membranes. The MP-ML mass concentrations contained in UWW and PIWW were measured by a simplified method adapted for the long-term monitoring of WWTP operations. The method was validated on standard samples. Despite the RGF system consumed less energy than UF treating UWW (0.097 kWh·m−3 and 0.156 kWh·m−3, respectively), RGF was not efficient enough to properly decrease the risk of MP-ML emissions (39.5 ± 34.6 % of MP-ML removal). With respect to PIWW, the energy consumption of the UF plant decreased up to 0.059 kWh·m−3. The combination of RGF and UF technologies was expected to reduce membrane fouling but it did not show significant differences in the mid-term operation.

Share this paper