Ind. Eng. Chem. Res.

2007, 46, 6661-6665 6661

Aerobic Granular Sludge Systems: The New Generation of Wastewater

Treatment Technologies
C. Di Iaconi,*,† R. Ramadori,‡ A. Lopez,† and R. Passino‡
Istituto di Ricerca Sulle Acque C.N.R., Via F. De Blasio 5, 70123 Bari, Italy, and Istituto di Ricerca Sulle
Acque C.N.R., Via Reno 1, 00198 Roma, Italy

The paper reports the results of a laboratory investigation aimed at evaluating the effectiveness of an innovative
technology, SBBGR (sequencing batch biofilter granular reactor), based on aerobic granular biomass, for
treating diluted (i.e., municipal wastewater) or concentrated (i.e., municipal landfill leachates) wastewater.
When this technology was applied to the treatment of municipal wastewater, the results showed that, even at
maximum organic load (i.e., 7 (kg of COD)/m3‚d), the chemical oxygen demand (COD) in the treated effluent
was lower than 50 mg/L. In addition, total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN) removal efficiency was higher than 87%
up to an organic load of 5.7 (kg of COD)/m3‚d, corresponding to a nitrogen load of 0.8 (kg of TKN)/m3‚d.
During the treatment of a mature municipal landfill leachate, the SBBGR proved suitable for removing the
entire biodegradable compound content (i.e., about 80% of the COD content of the leachate) up to an applied
organic loading value of 1.1 (kg of COD)/m3‚d. During the whole investigation, the process was characterized
by a low sludge production, about 1 order of magnitude lower than that of conventional systems.

1. Introduction the acronym SBBGR (sequencing batch biofilter granular

The two major problems in the field of wastewater biological
treatments recognized worldwide are the production of huge
amounts of sludge, usually associated with the treatment of
concentrated wastewater, and the difficulty in treating diluted
wastewater (such as municipal effluents) in which a very low
biomass concentration is achieved in conventional technologies
(i.e., activated sludge systems) with negative repercussions on
conversion capacities and consequent large area requirements.
This explains the great effort being made worldwide to find a
replacement for conventional technologies, with innovative ones
aimed at greater compactness, better operational flexibility, and
lower sludge production.1
Among the novel biological technologies recently developed
for wastewater treatment, the most attractive are systems based
on aerobic granular biomass. In such systems, the biomass grows
as compact and dense microbial granules, allowing greater
biomass retention in the reactor to be obtained, with interesting
repercussions on substrate conversion capacities. In fact, biomass
concentrations as high as 6.0-12 g/L and applied organic
loading rates up to 6-8 (kg of COD)/m3‚d are commonly
reported in the literature.2
Aerobic granular sludge is a young technology, and many
aspects still need to be investigated. For example, the causes
and mechanism of aerobic granulation are not yet fully
understood, although several factors have been described in the
literature, which may play an important role.3-11 In particular,
the operational periodic conditions seem to be crucial for the
granular growth. In fact, so far, aerobic granulation has been
observed mainly in suspended biomass-sequential batch reactors
(SBRs).12-15
With a different approach, the Water Research Institute
(IRSA) of the Italian National Research Council (CNR) has been
developing an aerobic granular biomass system, known with
* Correspondingauthor.Phone: +390805820511.Fax: +390805313365.
E-mail: claudio.diiaconi@ba.irsa.cnr.it.
†
Istituto di Ricerca Sulle Acque C.N.R.-Bari.
‡ The removed biomass was collected and measured in order to
Istituto di Ricerca Sulle Acque C.N.R.-Roma.
reactor), based on a submerged biofilter that operates in a “fill
and draw” mode. In this system, the granules are entrapped in
the pores produced by packing of bed material allowing greater
biomass retention in the reactor to be obtained (up to 50 g/L)
with interesting repercussions on substrate conversion capacities.
In addition, SBBGR technology is characterized by a very low
sludge production.16
In the SBBGR system, the granulation process takes place
during the reactor start-up period.17,18 Four steps can be
distinguished in this process: the formation of a thin biofilm
that completely covers the carrier surface; an increase in biofilm
thickness; the break-up of attached biofilm with the release of
biofilm particles; and the rearrangement of biofilm particles in
smooth granules.
The present paper reports the results of an investigation aimed
at assessing the effectiveness of SBBGR technology for treating
both municipal wastewater, characterized by low concentrations
of pollutants, and municipal landfill leachates, chosen as
representative of concentrated wastewater.
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. SBBGR System and Operative Schedule. The inves-
tigation was carried out using a lab-scale SBBGR, as shown in
Figure 1. It consisted of a closed cylindrical plexiglass vessel
(geometric volume ) 27 L; working liquid volume ) 12 L)
filled (fixed bed volume ) 15 L) with biomass support material
[plastic element (see Figure 1), length ) 7 mm; diameter ) 10
mm; specific surface ) 630 m2/m3; density ) 0.95 g/cm3; bed
porosity ) 0.75] held between two sieves and aerated by air
injection through porous stones placed close to the upper sieve.
An external loop allowed wastewater recirculation through the
bed, by means of a pump, in order to obtain a homogeneous
distribution of substrate and oxygen.
A pressure meter (manostat), set in the bottom of the reactor,
measured biofilter head losses on-line. When a fixed set value
of head loss was reached, a washing step was carried out using
compressed air (1.5 bar) in order to remove the excess biomass.

10.1021/ie061662l CCC: $37.00 © 2007 American Chemical Society

Published on Web 05/19/2007
6662 Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., Vol. 46, No. 21, 2007

Figure 1. Sketch (a) and photo (b) of SBBGR.

Table 1. Operative Conditions of SBBGR Throughout the Experimentation

period A subperiod period B subperiod
parameter 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
duration (months) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
organic load ((kg of COD)/m3·d) 0.9 1.8 3.6 5.7 7.0 0.6 1.1 2.2 3.4 4.5
nitrogen load ((kg of N)/ m3·d) 0.12 0.25 0.6 0.8 1.1 0.004 0.006 0.012 0.018 0.024
hydraulic residence time (d) 0.4 0.3 0.25 0.16 0.12 26 15 9 5 4
Cycle Phase Duration (min)
filling 10 10
aerobic degradation 220-700 1420
drawing phase 10 10

calculate the specific sludge production. Parameters such as
dissolved oxygen (DO), temperature, and pH were monitored
on-line. The system was fully automatic.
A high air-flow rate value (i.e., 200 L/h) was used, in order
to keep the dissolved oxygen concentration above the bed close
to the saturation value. This allowed the dissolved oxygen
concentration throughout the bed to be kept in the range 5-7
mg/ L, except during the filling time, when DO was lower.
Furthermore, the air-flow rate was controlled by a flow meter;
the temperature of the reactor was maintained at 20 °C using a
water jacket and a thermostat bath. The pH, which was
continuously monitored, remained in the range 7.0-7.5.
The operative schedule of the plant is reported in Table 1. In
practice, after a 3-month start-up period, during which careful
attention was paid to the generation of granular biomass,16 the
SBBGR was operated for an additional 15 months, divided into
two periods (A and B) of experimental activities. During period
A (length ) 7.5 months), the SBBGR treated the primary
effluent coming from a municipal wastewater treatment plant,
while in period B (length ) 7.5 months), it was fed with a
mature leachate coming from a local municipal landfill that had
been pretreated to reduce the high ammonia content by forming
ammonium phosphate. Periods A and B were split into five
subperiods, each characterized by progressively increasing
organic loads (see Table 1) in order to assess the maximum
value of the organic load compatible with good chemical oxygen
demand (COD) and nitrogen and total suspended solids (TSS)
removal efficiencies. In both periods, the SBBGR worked with
a cycle organized in three consecutive phases, namely, filling,
aerobic degradation, and drawing phases.
2.2. Analytical Methods. COD (chemical oxygen demand),
TKN (total Kjeldahl nitrogen), NH4-N (ammoniacal nitrogen),
NO3-N (nitrate nitrogen), PO4-P (orthophosphate-phospho-
rus), TSS (total suspended solids), and VSS (volatile suspended
solids) were determined according to standard methods.19
Instantaneous and composite samples of influent and effluent
were taken using automatic samplers. Oxygen consumption
(OC) of biomass was measured using a thermostatted closed
batch reactor (1 L working volume) characterized by a high
liquid/gas volume ratio (VL/VG ) 100). The content of the
reactor was thoroughly stirred by a magnetic mixer. There were
three openings in the reactor cover, one for inserting the oxygen
electrode (WTW OXI cell 325), one for the aeration frit, and
one for sampling. The oxygen electrode was interfaced with a
PC for automatic recording of data processed by specialized
software.
OC tests were carried out by adding to the reactor an
appropriate quantity of SBBGR biomass, diluted with tap water
to give a VSS concentration around 1000 mg/L. Allythiourea
(ATU) was added to the biomass in order to inhibit ammonia
oxidation. The first step of the procedure was the pre-aeration
of the biomass suspension, for at least 4 h, in order to remove
the residual COD in the sludge. After that, the sample was
oxygenated by pure oxygen until a 20 (mg of O2)/L dissolved
oxygen (DO) concentration was reached. The oxygen supply
was then turned off, and from the DO profile, the oxygen
consumption rate due to endogenous respiration was measured.
At this point, a fixed volume of filtered municipal wastewater
was added to get the same S/X SBBGR ratio, and the new DO
profile was recorded till the endogenous respiration phase was
obtained again. Pure oxygen was provided instead of air, in order
to ensure more effective oxygenation and easily reach an oxygen
concentration high enough to avoid reoxygenation during the
test. At the end of the test, a liquid sample was taken, filtered,
 Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., Vol. 46, No. 21, 2007 6663

Table 2. Average Compositions of SBBGR Influents (Municipal

Wastewater and Landfill Leachate) during the Investigation
municipal pretreated
parameter wastewater landfill leachate
COD (mg/L) 400 24 400
CODa (mg/L) 200 23 026
TKN (mg/L) 56.2 160
NH4-N (mg/L) 37.5 128
NO3-N (mg/L) absent absent
pH 7.6 8.4
PO4-P (mg/L) 2 14
TSS (mg/L) 160 1 540
VSS (mg/L) 133 1 300
a Filtered sample.

and analyzed in order to calculate the amount of COD removed

during the test. A filtered municipal wastewater was used instead
Figure 2. COD and TSS concentrations in the effluent and their relative
of an unfiltered sample in order to avoid the absorption of removal efficiencies as functions of applied organic load during period A.
suspended material on the biomass surface. The oxygen
consumption due to substrate consumption was obtained by
measuring the difference between the oxygen consumption rates
with and without wastewater.
2.3. Wastewater Composition. During period A, the SBBGR
treated primary effluent coming from a municipal wastewater
treatment plant (200 000 p.e.), located in Bari (southern Italy),
while in period B, it was fed with a pretreated leachate coming
from a mature municipal landfill located in Apulia, a region of
southern Italy. During the investigated period, the average
compositions of the two treated wastewaters were as reported
in Table 2.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Municipal Wastewater Treatment. The results obtained
during period A (treatment of municipal wastewater) are
reported in Figure 2. In particular, this figure reports COD and
total suspended solids concentrations recorded in the effluent
as well as their removal efficiencies all as functions of the
organic load applied. Looking at Figure 2, it is possible to note
that the effluent COD concentration was always lower than 50
mg/L with removal efficiencies around 90%, even when the
maximum organic load (i.e., 7.0 (kg of COD)/m3‚d) was applied.
Considering the high COD removal efficiencies obtained at this
organic loading value (7 (kg of COD)/m3‚d), it might have been
possible to increase the organic load further. However, this was
not attempted, since nitrogen removal was greatly affected at
this organic loading value, as reported below.
Nevertheless, this result is of great interest when compared
either to those obtained by activated sludge systems (commonly
characterized by volumetric conversion capacities <1 (kg of
COD)/m3‚d) or to those obtained by high-rate systems, such as
biofilters (commonly characterized by a COD removal efficiency
<80% for the same organic loading rate values).20,21
Regarding total suspended solids, it is possible to observe
the good filtration performances of the SBBGR system from
the data reported in Figure 2. In fact, the suspended solids
removal efficiency was about 90%, and the TSS concentration
in treated effluent was always <30 mg/L. As for nitrogen, Figure
3 reports TKN and nitrate concentrations recorded in the effluent
as well as TKN removal efficiencies as functions of applied
organic and nitrogen loads.
Looking at this figure, it is possible to observe that the
removal of TKN was almost complete (>90%) up to an organic
load value of 5.7 COD/m3‚d, corresponding to a nitrogen load
of 0.9 (kg of N)/m3‚d. Therefore, 5.7 (kg of COD)/m3‚d
represents the maximum organic load value compatible with
Figure 3. TKN and NO3-N concentrations in the effluent, and TKN
removal efficiencies as functions of applied organic and nitrogen loads
during period A.
significant nitrification efficiency. In fact, a further increase in
the organic load caused a relevant reduction in TKN removal
efficiencies. Moreover, nitrate nitrogen (NO3-N) concentration
in the treated effluents was always <5 mg/L. Considering that,
in the SBBGR treatment cycle, there was no anoxic phase (and
nitrite was absent), such a result indicates that, in the plant,
simultaneous nitrification and denitrification occurred. This
result can be ascribed to both high biomass concentration
(around 45 (g of TSS)/Lbed) and transient conditions, because
in such conditions oxygen cannot penetrate inside the deeper
layers of biomass and denitrifying bacteria can find carbon
sources coming from storage or hydrolysis products of particu-
late organic matter present in the feed.
Figure 4 shows COD, NH4-N, and NO3-N profiles recorded
during a typical cycle. Looking at this figure, it is possible to
observe that COD removal is completed during just the first 3
h of the cycle. As for ammonia, it is interesting to observe (1)
that its removal takes place simultaneously to the COD removal
and (2) that the ammonia removal rate is the same with or
without COD removal. Finally, the nitrate nitrogen profile shows
that denitrification occurred throughout the cycle.
During the whole of period A, the specific sludge production
of the SBBGR (i.e., (kg of TSS)/(kg of CODremoved)), calculated
by dividing the sludge production (i.e., TSS discharged with
the effluent + TSS removed during the washing steps) by the
amount of COD removed, was as low as 0.05 (i.e., a magnitude
6664 Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., Vol. 46, No. 21, 2007
Figure 4. COD, NH4+-N, and NO3-N profiles in a typical cycle.
Table 3. Oxygen Consumption and Removed COD Data Obtained
during Typical Tests Performed with Biomass of the SBBGR and
Filtered Municipal Wastewater
oxygen
consumption COD removed OC/COD
test (OC) (mg of O2) (mg of O2) removal ratio
1 8 8.5 0.94
2 6 6.2 0.97
3 8 8.3 0.96
4 8 8.5 0.94
order lower than that commonly reported for conventional
systems) with a washing operation frequency on average of 30
days.
The low sludge production is also confirmed by the oxygen
and COD consumption rates recorded during typical tests,
performed with filtered municipal wastewater in the same
substrate/biomass (i.e., the same S/X ratio) conditions. In fact,
from the data reported in Table 3, it is possible to observe that
about 95% of COD was removed by oxidation (i.e., oxygen
consumption/removed COD ratio was, on average, 0.95).
The low value of sludge production, almost one magnitude
order lower than that commonly reported for conventional
systems, can be explained considering the very high sludge age
value (θc ≈ 180 d) of the SBBGR, which leads to an increase
in biomass concentration.
3.2. Landfill Leachate Treatment. During period B, the
SBBGR was fed with a mature municipal landfill leachate,
pretreated for ammonia removal by forming magnesium am-
monium phosphate (MAP), through the addition of magnesium
oxide and phosphoric acid.
Figure 5 reports COD and TSS concentrations in the effluent
and their removal efficiencies as functions of applied organic
load.
It is possible to observe from this figure that, as expected,
the COD concentration in the treated effluent was never below
4 g/L, because of the presence of a fraction of organic
compounds recalcitrant to biological treatment. This is proved
by the fact that, up to a value of 2.2 (kg of COD)/m3‚d (i.e.,
subperiod 8; see Table 1), the same value of residual COD
(∼4 g/L) was always measured in treated effluents.
In addition, from Figure 5 it is also possible to observe that
COD removal efficiency gradually decreased with the increase
in the volumetric organic loading applied (i.e., from 78% at an
organic loading value of 1.1 (kg of COD)/m3‚d down to 68%,
when 4.5 (kg of COD)/m3‚d was applied). However, it must be
born in mind that increasing the organic loading value up to 4
times (i.e., from 1.1 to 4.5 (kg of COD)/m3‚d) caused a reduction
in COD removal efficiency of only 10% (i.e., from 78% to
Figure 5. COD and TSS concentrations in the effluent and their relative
removal efficiencies as functions of applied organic load during period B.
68%). This means that, if a reduction of 10% in the removal
efficiency was considered acceptable, then the reactor volume
could be reduced 4-fold with evident consequences in the
reduction of plant size. Regarding total suspended solids, from
the data reported in Figure 5, it is possible to observe that the
removal efficiencies of this parameter decreased (i.e., from 76%
to 60%) with the increase in organic loading.
Throughout the whole of period B, the process was character-
ized by a very low sludge production. In particular, the biomass
concentration in the bed stopped when it reached a value of 15
(g of TSS)/Lbed. In this situation, the specific sludge production
of the SBBGR was easily calculated by dividing the TSS
discharged with the effluent by the amount of COD removed.
Considering that the SBBGR was able to remove 78% of
influent COD (i.e., about 20 g/L) and the TSS content in the
effluent fell within the range 300-350 mg/L, it follows that a
value lower than 0.02 (kg of TSS)/(kg of CODremoved) was
obtained.
This result is particularly interesting considering that the
specific sludge production in conventional systems usually falls
in the range 0.3-0.5 (kg of TSS)/(kg of CODremoved),20,21 with
consequent huge amounts of sludge produced in the case of
concentrated wastewater treatment, such as leachates.
4. Conclusions
The main results of the investigation specifically aimed at
evaluating the performances of an innovative technology
(SBBGR) for treating municipal wastewater and landfill leachates
are as follows:
• As regards municipal wastewater treatment, high efficiencies
were recorded for removal of COD (90%), nitrogen (90%), and
suspended solids (90%) up to an applied organic loading value
of 5.7 (kg of COD)/m3‚d. corresponding to a nitrogen load of
0.8 (kg of TKN)/m3‚d.
• In the case of landfill leachate treatments, the SBBGR was
shown to be suitable for removing the entire content of
biodegradable compounds (i.e., about 80% of the COD content
of the leachate) up to an applied organic loading value of 1.1
(kg of COD)/m3‚d. By increasing volumetric organic loading
up to 4 times (i.e., 4.5 (kg of COD)/m3‚d), only a slight reduction
(i.e., 10%) in COD removal efficiency resulted.
• During the treatment of both types of wastewater, the
SBBGR was characterized by a low sludge production, i.e.,
almost 1 order of magnitude lower than that of conventional
systems.

The interesting results obtained at the bench scale convinced
the European Commission to finance by the LIFE financial
instrument the technological transfer to a demonstrative scale
of the SBBGR system (Project: life05 ENV/IT/000868). A
demonstrative SBBGR was designed and constructed, and now
it treats the primary effluents coming from a large municipal
treatment plant (200 000 a.e.) located in Bari (southern Italy).
Literature Cited
(1) Mulder, R.; Vereijken, T. L. F. M.; Frijters, C. M. T. J.; Vellinga,
S. H. J. Future perspectives in bioreactor development. Water Sci. Technol.
2001, 44 (8), 27-32.
(2) Liu, Y.; Tay, J.-H. State of the art of biogranulation technology for
wastewater treatment. Biotechnol. AdV. 2004, 22 (7), 533-563.
(3) De Kreuk, M. K.; Van Loosdrecht, M. C. M. Selection of Slow
Growing Organisms as a Means for Improving Aerobic Granular Sludge
Stability. Water Sci. Technol. 2004, 49 (11-12), 9-19.
(4) Pan, S.; Tay, J. H.; He, Y. X.; Tay, S. T. L. The effect of hydraulic
retention time on the stability of aerobically grown microbial granules. Lett.
Appl. Microbiol. 2004, 38 (2), 158-163.
(5) Qin, L.; Liu, Y.; Tay, J.-H. Effect of settling time on aerobic
granulation in sequencing batch reactor. Biochem. Eng. J. 2004, 21 (1),
47-52.
(6) Liu, Y.; Wang, Z. W.; Qin, L.; Liu, Y. Q.; Tay, J. H. Selection
pressure-driven aerobic granulation in a sequencing batch reactor. Appl.
Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2005, 67 (1), 26-32.
(7) De Kreuk, M. K.; McSwain, B. S.; Bathe, S.; Tay, S. T. L;
Schwarzenbeck, N.; Wilderer P. A. Discussion outcomes. Aerobic Granular
Sludge; Bathe, S., De Kreuk, M. K., Mc Swain, B. S., Schwarzenbeck, N.,
Eds.; IWA: London, U.K., 2005; pp 153-169.
(8) Liu, Y.; Tay, J.-H. The essential role of hydrodynamic shear force
in the formation of biofilm and granular sludge. Water Res. 2002, 36 (7),
1653-1665.
(9) McSwain, B. S.; Irvine, R. L.; Wilderer, P. A. The influence of
settling time on the formation of aerobic granules and extracellular polymeric
substances. Water Sci. Technol. 2004, 50 (10), 195-202.
(10) Wang, Z. W.; Liu, Y.; Tay, J. H. The role of SBR mixed liquor
Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., Vol. 46, No. 21, 2007 6665
volume exchange ratio in aerobic granulation. Chemosphere 2006, 62 (5),
767-771.
(11) Tay, J. H.; Tay, S. T. L.; Liu, Y.; Yeow, S. K.; Ivanov, V.
Biogranulation technologies for wastewater treatment; Waste Management
Series; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2006.
(12) Beun, J. J.; van Loosdrecht, M. C. M.; Heijnen, J. J. Aerobic
granulation. Water Sci. Technol. 2000, 41 (4/5), 41-48.
(13) Etterer, T.; Wilderer, P. A. Generation and properties of aerobic
granular sludge. Water Sci. Technol. 2001, 43 (3), 19-26.
(14) Beun, J. J.; Hendriks, A.; van Loosdrecht, M. C. M.; Morgenroth,
E.; Wilderer, P. A.; Heijnen, J. J. Aerobic granulation in a sequencing batch
reactor. Water Res. 1999, 33 (10), 2283-2290.
(15) Morgenroth, E.; Sherden, T.; van Loosdrecht, M. C. M.; Heijnen,
J. J.; Wilderer, P. A. Aerobic granular sludge in a sequencing batch reactor.
Water Res. 1997, 31 (12), 3191-3194.
(16) Di Iaconi, C.; Lopez, A.; Ramadori, R.; Passino, R. Tannery
Wastewater Treatment by Sequencing Batch Biofilm Reactor. EnViron. Sci.
Technol. 2003, 37 (14), 3199-3205.
(17) Di Iaconi, C.; Ramadori, R.; Lopez, A.; Passino, R. Hydraulic shear
stress calculation in a sequencing batch biofilm reactor with granular
biomass. EnViron. Sci. Technol. 2005, 39 (3), 889-894.
(18) Di Iaconi, C.; Ramadori, R.; Lopez, A. Aerobic granulation during
the start up period of a periodic biofilter. In Aerobic Granular Sludge; Bathe,
S., De Kreuk, M. K., Mc Swain, B. S., Schwarzenbeck, N., Eds.; Water
and Environmental Management Series (WEMS); IWA: London, U.K.,
2005; pp 15-24.
(19) APHA, AWWA, WPCF. Standard Methods for the examination
of water and wastewater, 20th ed.; American Public Health Association:
Washington, DC, 1999.
(20) Canler, J. P.; Perret, J. M. Biological aerated filters: Assessment
of the process based on 12 sewage treatment plants. Water Sci. Technol.
1994, 29 (10/ 11), 13-22.
(21) Pujol, R.; Canler, J. P.; Iwema, A. Biological aerated filters: An
attractive and alternative biological process. Water Sci. Technol. 1992, 26
(3/4), 693-702.
ReceiVed for reView December 22, 2006
ReVised manuscript receiVed March 27, 2007
Accepted March 30, 2007
IE061662L