diation &

me B
re

Journal of
urnal of Bio

iod
Cesaro et al., J Bioremed Biodeg 2013, 4:8

egradation
DOI: 10.4172/2155-6199.1000208
Bioremediation & Biodegradation
Jo

ISSN: 2155-6199

Review Article Open

OpenAccess
Access

Wastewater Treatment by Combination of Advanced Oxidation Processes

and Conventional Biological Systems
Alessandra Cesaro*, Vincenzo Naddeo and Vincenzo Belgiorno
SEED - Sanitary Environmental Engineering Division, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Salerno via Giovanni Paolo II, 84084 - Fisciano (SA), Italy

Abstract
One of the most challenging issues of the last decades is the presence of recalcitrant compounds in the effluents
of wastewater treatment plants, due to their toxicity on both human health and environment. Although conventional
biological processes are usually efficient for the degradation of pollutants occurring in wastewaters, most of these
compounds are not effectively removed.
In this context, Advanced Oxidation Processes (AOPs), which are oxidation methods relying on the action
of highly reactive species such as hydroxyl radicals, are raising great interest for the removal of those organic
pollutants not treatable by conventional techniques due to their high chemical stability and/or low biodegradability.
As several studies pointed out the effectiveness of AOPs in the degradation of a wide spectrum of both organic and
inorganic pollutants, they are considered a highly competitive wastewater treatment technology. However, in order to
reduce operating costs associated to the application of AOPs, their proper combination with conventional biological
processes should be considered.
This work aims to discuss the most common AOPs used as pretreatment of wastewater for its biological
processing, in order to highlight the enhancement of wastewater biological treatability supplied by different advanced
oxidation methods. To this end, main standard tests and parameters for wastewater biodegradability assessment are
also pointed out, thus providing an overview of the most reliable ones.

Keywords: Biodegradability; Emerging contaminants; Fenton
processes; Free radicals; Oxidation; Ozone; Photocatalysis; Recalcitrant
compounds; Ultrasound
Introduction
In the last years, one of the major concerns to water quality is
related to the detection of chemical pollutants in both industrial and
municipal wastewater. Most of these contaminants, both synthetic
organic chemicals and naturally occurring substances, enter the
aquatic medium in several different ways and, according to their water-
solubility, can be transported and distributed in the water cycle [1].
The risk associated to these contaminants, such as pharmaceuticals,
endocrine disruptor, personal care products, pesticides, is related to
their ubiquity and persistence into the environment as well as to their
biological activity that may affect the development of aquatic organisms
and wildlife [2].
The effluents of urban wastewater treatment plants are among the
major responsible for the release of this kind of contaminants into
the environment [2,3]. Although conventional biological processes
are usually efficient for the degradation of pollutants occurring in
wastewater, refractory compounds are not effectively removed [4].
In such cases the use of Advanced Oxidation Processes (AOPs)
may improve the overall removal efficiency of such compounds.
AOPs are based on the chemistry of hydroxyl radicals (• OH),
which are non-selective reactive species, able to oxidize pollutants into
mineral end-products, yielding CO2 and inorganic ions [5].
However, the use of AOPs is not cost-effective if intended to
mineralize toxic and recalcitrant compounds in wastewater [1].
Therefore, suitable application of AOPs should not consider, whenever
possible, the replacement of the more economic biological processes
[6], but the proper combination of both systems.
AOPs can be used as pre- and/or post-treatment of biological
systems (Figure 1). In the former case, AOPs aim to improve biological
treatability of wastewaters, thus favouring their processing by means
of common microorganisms [7-9]. In the latter, the oxidation step is
directed towards the removal of those contaminants not completely
degraded during the biological treatment [10].
In order to ensure the economic optimization of the combined
process, it is necessary to limit the intensity and/or duration of the
advanced treatment. As a result, special attention must be paid to
the procedures useful to evaluate the efficiency of the process. When
AOPs are used as pretreatment of wastewater for their biological
processing, their performances have to be adequately assessed through
biodegradability tests [11].
This work discusses the most studied AOPs used as pretreatment
of wastewaters for biological processing, in order to highlight the
enhancement of wastewater biological treatability supplied by
different advanced processes. To this end, wastewater biodegradability
assessment is pointed out, with reference to the most spread standard
tests and parameters, thus providing an overview of the most reliable
ones.
*Corresponding author: A Cesaro, SEED - Sanitary Environmental Engineering
Division, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Salerno via Giovanni Paolo
II, 84084 - Fisciano (SA), Italy, E-mail: acesaro@unisa.it
Received August 30, 2013; Accepted September 30, 2013; Published October
05, 2013
Citation: Cesaro A, Naddeo V, Belgiorno V (2013) Wastewater Treatment by
Combination of Advanced Oxidation Processes and Conventional Biological
Systems. J Bioremed Biodeg 4: 208. doi:10.4172/2155-6199.1000208
Copyright: © 2013 Cesaro A, et al. This is an open-a ccess article distributed under
the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted
use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and
source are credited.

J Bioremed Biodeg
ISSN: 2155-6199 JBRBD, an open access journal Volume 4 • Issue 8 • 1000208
Citation: Cesaro A, Naddeo V, Belgiorno V (2013) Wastewater Treatment by Combination of Advanced Oxidation Processes and Conventional
Biological Systems. J Bioremed Biodeg 4: 208. doi:10.4172/2155-6199.1000208
a.
b.
Figure 1: AOP as pretreatment (a.) and post-treatment (b.) of biological system.
Degradation Mechanisms by Advanced Oxidation
Processes
The efficacy of AOPs in improving biological degradability of
recalcitrant compounds in wastewater depends on both chemical
and physical properties of contaminants as well as on the generation
of reactive free radicals, in most cases hydroxyl radicals [12]. The
oxidation reaction between these radicals and the contaminants is the
mechanism behind the degradation of the contaminant itself.
The generation of these reactive agents can be achieved by means
of several processes, including, sonolysis [13], ozone-based processes
[14], Fenton-based reactions [15], heterogeneous photocatalysis [16]
and various combination of these technologies [17-19]. Each one can
be characterized according to the specific method for the production
of free radicals.
Sonochemical processes imply the application of ultrasound (US),
which refers to sound waves with a frequency ranging between 20 kHz
and 500 MHz. When ultrasound propagates in a liquid, it promotes the
formation of cavitational bubbles, whose collapse is associated to both
physical and chemical effects [13]. In particular, at high frequencies,
chemical ultrasonic effects are predominant due to the larger formation
of free radicals [20].
These radicals move to the liquid-gas interface to react with the
organic substrate [21] or, in the case of high concentration, they
recombine with each other to form H2O2 [22], which is an oxidative
agent as well, thus providing the degradation of contaminants.
Sonolysis is a versatile process, which has been widely studied for
the degradation of several compounds [23-25] even in combination
with other AOPs [26]. Its main disadvantage is related to energy
consumption. This item often limits the applicability of the ultrasonic
technology to small volumes. Differently, ozonation has shown a very
strong oxidizing power with short reaction times, thus allowing the
treatment of great amount of wastewaters.
The process relies on ozone, which is unstable in an aqueous
medium. It decomposes spontaneously by a complex mechanism
that involves the generation of hydroxyl free radicals. Therefore, the
degradation of pollutants occurs by both ozone itself and radicals [27],
although the latter is more powerful than the former, as highlighted in
Table 1, reporting the reaction rate constants for both oxidants with
reference to several compounds.
J Bioremed Biodeg
ISSN: 2155-6199 JBRBD, an open access journal
Page 2 of 8
Although ozonation has already been applied at full-scale, as
already pointed out for sonolysis, it is an energy intensive process,
characterized by high operating costs, mainly associated to ozone
generation.
As ozone is an unstable molecule, it should be generated at the
point of application. To this end, several methods can be used, but
the most common within ozone generation industry is the corona
discharge one, which requires a considerable energy input.
Ozone technology has also been studied in combination with
ultraviolet (UV) radiation, since UV photons are able to activate ozone
molecules. In this way, the formation of hydroxyl radicals is promoted
[28,29], but any relevant energy saving can be pursued.
UV radiation, in the wavelength range between 200 and 280 nm,
can also be applied in combination with hydrogen peroxide (H2O2).
The major drawback of this process is related to the small molar
extinction coefficient of H2O2. Therefore, only a relative small fraction
of incident light is exploited, especially when organic substrates will
act as inner filters. Moreover, the rate of photolysis of aqueous H2O2 is
pH dependent: it was found to increase when more alkaline conditions
are used [6].
H2O2 occurs also in Fenton based processes: its reaction with iron
in water, under acidic conditions, determines the formation of radicals.
The rate constant for the reaction of ferrous ion with hydrogen peroxide
is high and Fe(II) oxidizes to Fe(III) in a few seconds to minutes in the
presence of excess amounts of hydrogen peroxide, which decomposes
by Fe(III) and generates again hydroxyl radicals. The major parameter
affecting Fenton processes are: the pH of the solution, the amount of
ferrous ions, the concentration of H2O2, the initial concentration of
contaminants and the presence of other ions [30]. Moreover, Fenton
reagent action can be significantly improved when exposed to UV
radiation [31].
Enhancement of reagent yields after light irradiation is the concept
on which also photocatalytic processes have been developed.
Heterogeneous photocatalysis is a photochemical reaction,
accelerated by the action of a catalyst: one of the most widely used
and highly effective is TiO2 [32]. The mechanism action is based on
the transition of electrons from the valence to the conduction band,
which is caused by the light irradiation of the catalyst. In particular,
Volume 4 • Issue 8 • 1000208
Citation: Cesaro A, Naddeo V, Belgiorno V (2013) Wastewater Treatment by Combination of Advanced Oxidation Processes and Conventional
Biological Systems. J Bioremed Biodeg 4: 208. doi:10.4172/2155-6199.1000208
Compound O3 OH•
Chlorinated alkenes 10 ÷ 10
-3 -4
10 ÷ 1011
9 to quantify main degradation products. The measurement of
Phenols 103 109 ÷ 1010
N-containig organics 10 ÷ 102 108 ÷ 1010
Aromatics 1 ÷ 10 2
108 ÷ 1010
Ketones 1 109 ÷ 1010
Alcohols 10-2 ÷ 1 108 ÷ 109
Table 1: Ozone and hydroxyl radical rate constants, as L/mol s [28].
both migrating electrons and the holes created in the valence band
can participate in redox reactions with compounds absorbed on the
photocatalyst [33]. The presence of molecules which compete with the
contaminants for reactive sites should be, therefore, avoided.
Notwithstanding the possibility of mineralization of several
compounds, photocatalysis full-scale application is still not spread due
to both technical and economic reasons, mainly related to the proper
handling of the catalyst.
Table 2 summarizes main advantages and drawbacks for the
discussed AOPs.
The design of AOPs depends on several parameters, including:
reagent dosage and ratios with other substances, contact time and
reactor configuration. The optimal conditions have to be determined
with reference to the treatment scenario of interest [34]. Reasonably,
longer contact time as well as higher reagent dosage result in more
effective treatment but also in operating costs which can be not
sustainable.
Differently, when AOPs are used in combination with conventional
biological treatment of wastewaters, their application is not intended
to remove refractory compounds and can be cost-competitive. In this
contest, the feasibility of AOPs is highly dependent on the enhancement
of wastewater biological treatability and, consequently, the assessment
of biodegradability plays a fundamental role.
Wastewater Biodegradability Assessment
In scientific literature, biodegradability concept has been used to
refer to different characteristics of a substrate, such as persistence [35]
or bioavailability [36]. In the field of water and wastewater treatment,
biodegradability often implies the biological treatability of the
investigated substrates [37].
Due to these differences, several tests have been developed in time
to assess biodegradability.
OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation and
Development) guidelines distinguish three main groups within the
biodegradability test system [38]:
- Ready Biodegradability Tests (RBTs), which are useful for quick
screening. They all rely on the principle that biodegradation
is monitored as the degree of mineralization, by means of
aggregated parameters such as oxygen uptake, carbon dioxide
production or reduction of dissolved organic carbon (DOC);
- Inherent Biodegradability Tests (IBTs), to demonstrate the
potential degradability of a compound. Differently from RBTs,
biodegradation conditions are optimized, thus making them
really reliable;
- Simulation Tests (STs), designed to measure the rate of
biodegradation in a specified environmental compartment.
Test substance concentration varies according to the test aim:
J Bioremed Biodeg
ISSN: 2155-6199 JBRBD, an open access journal
Page 3 of 8
it is lower, if intended to provide biodegradation rates; higher
degradation rates, moreover, requires specific analysis.
According to this classification, a fundamental step for the
evaluation of wastewater biodegradability is the performance of RBTs.
A compound can be considered readily biodegradable, if the results of
RBTs fit the following criteria [39]:
- O2 uptake or CO2 evolution achieves at least 60% of the
theoretical one or DOC removal reaches 70%;
- time elapsed from the start of the mineralization process,
defined as 10% of the theoretical one until the required plateau
is reached, should be no longer than 10 days.
According to OECD guidelines, if these conditions are not fulfilled,
the test substance cannot be considered "not biodegradable", but should
undergo additional trials, even within the class of the RBTs. Although
some of these tests based on respirometry for the determination of O2
uptake are more versatile than others, their applicability depends also
on the kind of substances which are being investigated, as shown in
Table 3 [40].
Table 4 lists the most performed IBTs, highlighting that the
population density is higher than the one of RBTs. This item makes the
conditions for the biodegradation optimal. Therefore, a negative result
would indicate a high persistence of the test substance, suggesting that
no further research on biodegradation should be performed [38].
An important aspect to be taken into account is reproducibility of
test results.
One of the most recent studies on the topic [11] was carried
out comparing different tests to determine the biodegradability
enhancement during the advanced treatment of wastewater samples
containing 200 mgDOC/L of a pesticide mixture. Authors found that the
results of Zahn-Wellens test were consistent with the ones achieved
through the Pseudomonas putida bioassay. The use of this bacteria is
standardized within the procedures provided by DIN 38 412 Part 8
(1991) and DIN 38 412 Part 27 (1993) to assess water and wastewater
toxicity, by evaluating the growth inhibition in 30 minutes. In the study
of Ballesteros Martín et al. [11], the same bacteria species was used as
culture mean for a bioassay, incubated for 120 h. As for the Zahn-
Wellens tests, biodegradability efficiency of the investigated AOP was
assessed in terms of DOC removal.
Results showed that both Zahn-Wellens test and Pseudomonas
putida bioassay proved to be the most suitably judging by repeatability
and precision. The main advantage of the Pseudomonas putida test is
the shorter time required to obtain reliable results, in comparison to
the Zahn-Wellens test, lasting 28 days.
The duration of biodegradability tests can be a discriminating
factor in the choice of the test itself as well as the operating simplicity,
especially in research screening steps. This item has promoted the
use of BOD5/COD ratio, which is quite spread in literature [41] as
biodegradability indicator: when the ratio is higher than 0.4, the test
substance is considered biodegradable [42].
Although biodegradability tests provide useful information
concerning the effect of chemical pre-treatment on subsequent
biological degradation of wastewater, experiments integrating chemical
and biological degradation are necessary for a more realistic viewpoint
of the combined process [1].
Volume 4 • Issue 8 • 1000208
Citation: Cesaro A, Naddeo V, Belgiorno V (2013) Wastewater Treatment by Combination of Advanced Oxidation Processes and Conventional
Biological Systems. J Bioremed Biodeg 4: 208. doi:10.4172/2155-6199.1000208

Page 4 of 8

AOP Advantages Disadvantages

- Versatile technology
- Energy consuming technology
US - Suitable for small volumes
- Sonotrode erosion issues
- Interesting upgrade applications
- Strong oxidative power - Energy consuming
O3 - Effective for a wide spectrum of pollutants - High operating costs
- Existing full-scale applications - Risks associated to ozone generation
O3/UV - More effective than O3 or UV alone - More energy intensive than single processes
- UV promote •OH formation
H2O2/UV - Turbidity can interfere with UV radiation
- High efficiency
- Developing technology
Fenton-based reactions - Not as energy intensive as other AOPs
- Need for acidic conditions
- Can be performed at higher wavelenghts than other UV- - Developing technology
UV/TiO2
based processes - Need for pretreatment
Table 2: Advantages and drawbacks of discussed AOPs.

Maximum microbial concentration Suitability for compounds

Test Measured parameter
[CFU/mL] Poorly soluble Volatile Adsorbing
DOC Die-Away (301 A) DOC (2 ÷ 10) • 105 - - +/-
CO2 evolution (301 B) CO2 evolution (respirometry) (2 ÷ 10) • 105 + - +
MITI (I) (301 C) O2 (respirometry) (2 ÷ 10) • 105 + +/- +
Closed bottle (301 D) O2 (respirometry) (0,5 ÷ 2.5) • 103 - - +/-
Modified OECD Screening (301 E) DOC (0,5 ÷ 2.5) • 102 +/- + +
Manometric respirometry (301 F) O2 (respirometry) (2 ÷ 10) • 105 + +/- +
+ suitable; - not suitable; +/- suitable under specific conditions
Table 3: Applicability of OECD (301 series) test methods (adapted from Pedrazzani [40]).

Test Measured parameter Maximum microbial concentration [CFU/mL]

Zahn-Wellens Test (302 B) DOC (0.7 ÷ 3) • 107
SCAS (302 A) DOC (2 ÷ 10) • 107
MITI (II) (302 C) O2 (0.7 ÷ 3) • 106
Table 4: IBTs (adapted by Struijs et al. [38]).

Combined AOPs and Biological Processes
Wastewater Treatment
Most studies dealing with AOPs as pretreatment of wastewater for
their biological processing refer to laboratory and pilot scale tests.
One of the main obstacles to the scale up of AOPs for the treatment
of wastewater prior to biological processes is related to the oxidant
dose. High reagent concentrations determine significant increases in
operating costs as well as serious damages to microorganisms [43,44].
On the other hand, low reagent doses could result in inadequate
pretreatment of wastewaters.
The effectiveness of AOPs has been extensively proved for the
pretreatment of several kinds of wastewaters, including industrial ones
[45], as they can be conveniently reused within the productive process.
According to Scottis and Ollis [46], the kinds of wastewater that can
be successfully treated by means of combined AOPs/biological processes
are the ones containing bio-resistant or recalcitrant compounds, which
are often of industrial origin, as well as the wastewaters containing
pollutants resulting in toxicity for microorganisms.
Among bio-resistant compounds, pesticides arise great concern,
since their high solubility makes their propagation in the environment
extremely easy. Although several processes have been studied for the
pretreatment of wastewater polluted by pesticides, the most recent
trend is directed toward the combination of Fenton and photo-Fenton
processes with aerobic biological treatment [47,48].
Zapata et al. [49] found that the photo-Fenton treatment at pilot
plant scale was able to increase the biodegradability of a wastewater
for polluted with commercial pesticides from 50% to 95% as well as
to reduce its toxicity (from 96% to 50% of inhibition). Authors also
observed that the most suitable point for combining the photo-Fenton
process with the biological treatment was after the total elimination of
the active ingredients. The efficiency of the combined photo-Fenton/
biological system in terms of mineralization was 94%, while the
combination bio/photo-Fenton was not successful, thus pointing out
the importance of the proper identification of the sequence within
treatment units.
Fenton based processes have been also applied to several industrial
wastewaters, such as tannery effluents, which are usually characterized
by low pH, relatively high temperature and high presence of aromatic
compounds.
In the study of Mandal et al. [50], the application of Fenton process
as pretreatment for a biological system allowed the reduction of
pollutant content, in terms of both COD and BOD5, thus improving
the biodegradability and reducing the duration of biological treatment.
The main drawback of the combined Fenton/biological process was the
high production of sludge (about 3 kg dry sludge/m3), which greatly
affect the economic balance, as observed also in the study of Di Iaconi
et al. [51].
Fenton raection was also studied by Feng et al. [52] in combination
with a membrane bioreactor (MBR) for the advanced processing of
the effluent from an integrated dyeing wastewater treatment plant.
In this study, Zahn-Wallens Test was used to assess the wastewater
biodegradability enhancement after Fenton process. However, the
same effect was also evaluated in terms of TOC, after the Fenton
treatment as well as after the combined Fenton/MBR system. Although

J Bioremed Biodeg
ISSN: 2155-6199 JBRBD, an open access journal Volume 4 • Issue 8 • 1000208
Citation: Cesaro A, Naddeo V, Belgiorno V (2013) Wastewater Treatment by Combination of Advanced Oxidation Processes and Conventional
Biological Systems. J Bioremed Biodeg 4: 208. doi:10.4172/2155-6199.1000208
a IBTs was performed, the estimation of TOC allowed a prompt
comparative assessment between the single AOP and its combination
with a biological system by means of a parameter that is common and
easy to determine.
Similar consideration arises for the study of Oller et al. [53],
reporting the combination, at pilot scale, of Fenton process with an
attached biomass biological reactor, for the treatment of 4 m3/d of
pharmaceutical wastewater, with a concentration of 600 mg/L of
α-methylphenylglycine and a DOC value in the range 400-600 mg/L.
In this case, the removal reached through the combined process was
evaluated in terms of DOC and was found to reach values up to 95%.
Pharmaceuticals represent only one of the widest categories of
concern among emerging contaminants because of their endocrine-
disrupting properties. Personal-care products, steroid sex hormones,
illicit drugs, flame retardants and perfluorinated compounds are
other particularly relevant examples of such emerging compounds,
whose high transformation/removal rates are compensated by their
continuous introduction into the environment. In order to increase
biodegradability and detoxify effluent streams containing such
compounds, alternative treatments with AOPs have been studied [54-
56].
Naddeo et al. [24] investigated the application of sonolysis on the
degradation of three kinds of pharmaceuticals, both in single solutions
and as mixtures spiked in urban wastewater effluent. Several operating
conditions were studied and the aerobic biodegradability variation
assessed by BOD5/COD ratio. It was found that the pharmaceuticals
conversion enhanced for increasing ultrasonic power densities.
Reaction by-products proved to be more stable than the original
compounds as well as more readily biodegradable, thus suggesting the
effectiveness of sonolysis as pretreatment rather than post-treatment. In
the former case, lower energy input can be provided in order to achieve
an adequate increase in biodegradability and promote the consequent
processing of wastewater by conventional biological systems.
The great potential of ultrasonic irradiation for the degradation
of toxic organic compounds in wastewater was also highlighted in the
study of De Bel et al. [57]. Authors found that, although there was only
a minor decrease in COD after treatment, the BOD/COD ratio of the
antibiotic solution increased from 0.06 to a maximum of 0.60.
Sonolysis has been widely investigated as wastewater treatment
prior to biological processes [58,59] for the increase of different
organic substrates biodegradability [60-62], also in combination with
other AOPs [63]. Most studies, however, are focused on the effects of
AOPs on organic substance removal rather than the improvement in
biodegradability. Sangave et al. [64] evaluated the effectiveness of a
Wastewater characteristics Biodegradability parameter
Municipal WWTP effluent BOD5
BOD5 increase, BOD/COD,
Textile dye
OD/TOC
Phenolic solution BOD5/COD
BOD5 increase
Pulp mill alkaline bleach plant effluent  [71]
COD reduction
Procaine penicillin G formulation effluent BOD5
BOD5/COD
Diclofenac in aqueous solution
Zahn-Wellens test
Textile wastewater BOD5/COD
Table 5: Evaluation of ozone effect on wastewater biodegradability.
J Bioremed Biodeg
ISSN: 2155-6199 JBRBD, an open access journal
Page 5 of 8
combined US/ozone process in improving the aerobic degradation of
distillery wastewater and observed a COD reduction up to 45%.
A more recent work was carried out with reference to ozonation,
applied in the treatment line for remediation of different kinds of
wastewater. Integrated schemes considering ozonation alone as both
pre- and post-treatment for the biological processing of distillery
wastewater allowed around 79% reduction of pollutants, expressed as
COD, compared to 35% COD reduction with a not ozonated sample
[65].
Similarly, Di Iaconi et al. [66] operated at demonstrative scale an
aerobic granular biomass system (SBBGR – Sequencing Batch Biofilter
Granular Reactor) integrated with ozonation for the treatment of
tannery wastewater. Results showed the removal efficiencies of the
combined process for several parameters, including COD, TSS, TKN,
as well as the estimation of sludge production for the assessment of the
process economic feasibility. The same process scheme was used in the
study of Lotito et al. [67] for the treatment of textile wastewater.
In all cases, any test to assess changes in biodegradability after
ozone application was performed, whereas several studies dealing with
the assessment of biodegradability enhancement after the application
of ozonation to specific kinds of wastewaters are reported in literature
(Table 5).
As shown in Table 5, BOD5/COD ratio was found to be the most
common parameter used to assess the biodegradability of a test
substance after ozonation, even in combination with other AOPs [68-
75].
The recurring use of this parameter is related to the operational
simplicity, although several tests have been standardized to assess
biodegradability and to provide specific information about this
property.
Conclusion
Advanced Oxidation Processes represent one of the most promising
options for the removal of persistent compounds in wastewater
treatment effluents.
The action mechanism of AOPs relies on the formation of high
reactive oxidant species, mainly hydroxyl radicals, which can react
with recalcitrant compounds until their mineralization occurs.
However, when AOPs are intended to remove all these pollutants from
wastewaters, their application can be not sustainable. Conversely, their
combination with conventional biological processes can be considered
a valid option. It has been extensively proved that AOPs can improve
the biological treatability of wastewaters, thus enhancing the removal
of both organic matter and recalcitrant compounds.
Work highlights Reference
Biodegradability increase due to the change in molecular structure of refractory
[68]
compounds decreased inhibitory effects
Under optimal conditions, the BOD/TOC and BOD/COD ratios increased up to
[69]
0.58 and 0.27, respectively.
The BOD5/COD ratio increased to 0.18, 0.26 for the test solutions, under the best
[70]
treatment time.
Ozone treatment enhanced the biodegradability of the effluent, monitored as 21%
COD reduction and 13% BOD5 enhancement
No significant correlation existed between the BOD5 and the toxicity test results [72]
Ozonation promotes a more biocompatible effluent of waters containing diclofenac [73]
Biodegradability enhancement by a factor up to 6,8-fold [74]
Volume 4 • Issue 8 • 1000208
Citation: Cesaro A, Naddeo V, Belgiorno V (2013) Wastewater Treatment by Combination of Advanced Oxidation Processes and Conventional
Biological Systems. J Bioremed Biodeg 4: 208. doi:10.4172/2155-6199.1000208
In this contest, the assessment of biodegradability variation after
the application of AOPs plays a fundamental role, so that specific
procedures have been standardized in time. However, even though
they are now well developed, results of the biodegradability variation
after AOPs are usually expressed in terms of BOD5, COD, BOD5/
COD ratio, DOC. Differently from biodegradability assays, these
parameters are easy and quick to determine. Moreover, their recurring
occurrence in scientific literature allows the immediate comparison of
results obtained from different studies dealing with the use of AOPs as
wastewater pretreatment for its biological processing.
This aspect is particularly important when considering that the
investigation of advanced treatment effects generally follows two
different approaches.
In the first one, research is focused on the effectiveness of AOPs in
improving wastewater biodegradability. This approach is developed to
deepen the study of the viability of the investigated AOPs as biological
system pretreatment and/or to assess the qualitative characterization of
its intermediates.
In the second one, aim of the experimental study is the integrated
AOPs/biological process feasibility. This second kind of approach
is pursuable when the enhancement of biodegradability after the
application of the studied AOPs is already clear and the feasibility of
the combined process has to be assessed.
Therefore, the comprehension of the action mechanisms of
investigated AOPs has been extensively studied and the potential of
several processes has been recognized.
The gap that scientific research should cover is the assessment
of the technical and economic feasibility of AOPs as treatment of
wastewater before its conventional biological processing. To this end,
further research should be mainly addressed towards:
- the definition of removal kinetics of pollutants after combined
AOPs/biological processes, in order to optimize the operating
conditions as well as to identify modelling tools to generalize
experimental data;
- The assessment of the combined AOPs/biological process
efficiency in larger scale continuously operated systems, in
order to promote its scale up.
Acknowledgements
Research activities were partly funded by the FARB project of the University
of Salerno and PRIN project founded by Italian Ministry of University. Assistance
provided by P. Napodano is deeply appreciated.
References
1. Oller I, Malato S, Sánchez-Pérez J A (2011) Combination of Advanced Oxidation
Processes and biological treatments for wastewater decontamination-A review.
Science of the Total Environment 409: 4141-4166.
2. Kasprzyk-Hordern B, Dinsdale RM, Guwy AJ (2008) The occurrence of
pharmaceuticals, personal care products, endocrine disruptors and illicit drugs
in surface water in South Wales, UK. Water Res 42: 3498-3518.
3. Kasprzyk-Hordern B, Dinsdale R M, Guwy A J (2009) The removal of
pharmaceuticals, personal care products, endocrine disruptors and illicit drugs
during wastewater treatment and its impact on the quality of receiving waters.
Water Research 43: 363-380.
4. Jeworski M, Heinzle E (2000) Combined chemical-biological treatment of
wastewater containing refractory pollutants. Biotechnol Annu Rev 6: 163-196.
5. Estrada AL, Li YY, Wang A (2012) Biodegradability enhancement of wastewater
containing cefalexin by means of the electro-Fenton oxidation process. J
Hazard Mater 227-228: 41-8.
J Bioremed Biodeg
ISSN: 2155-6199 JBRBD, an open access journal
Page 6 of 8
6. Andreozzi R, Caprio V, Insola A, Marotta R. (1999) Advanced oxidation
processes (AOP) for water purification and recovery. Catalysis Today 53: 51-
59.
7. Karrer N.J, Ryhiner G, Hinzle E (1997) Applicability test for combined biological-
chemical treatment of wastewaters containing biorefractory compounds. Water
Research 31: 1013-1020.
8. Yu G, Zhu W, Yang Z (1998) Pretreatment and biodegradability enhancement
of DSD acid manufacturing wastewater. Chemosphere 37: 487-494.
9. Bila DM, Montalvão AF, Silva AC, Dezotti M (2005) Ozonation of a landfill
leachate: evaluation of toxicity removal and biodegradability improvement. J
Hazard Mater 117: 235-242.
10. Poole AJ (2004) Treatment of biorefractory organic compounds in wool scour
effluent by hydroxyl radical oxidation. Water Res 38: 3458-3464.
11. Ballesteros Martín M M, Casas López J.L, Oller I, Malato S, Sánchez Pérez J.A.
(2010) A comparative study of different tests for biodegradability enhancement
determination during AOP treatment of recalcitrant toxic aqueous solutions.
Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety 73: 1189-1195.
12. Kommineni S, Zoeckler J, Stocking A, Liang S, Flores A, Kavanaugh M (2000)
Advanced Oxidation Processes Chapter 3.0 Literature Review.
13. Mason T J, Peters D (2002) Practical Sonochemistry: Power Ultrasound and
Applications, 2nd ed. Chichester England: Horwood Publishing Series in
Chemical Science.
14. Glaze W H, Kang J W, Chapin D H (1987) The Chemistry of Water Treatment
Processes Involving Ozone, Hydrogen Peroxide, and Ultraviolet Radiation.
Ozone Science and Engineering 9: 335-342.
15. Chamarro E, Marco A, Esplugas S (2001) Use of Fenton reagent to improve
organic chemical biodegradability. Water Res 35: 1047-1051.
16. Fujishima A, Honda K (1972) Electrochemical photolysis of water at a
semiconductor electrode. Nature 238: 37-38.
17. Prengle H W, Nall A E, Joshi D S (1980) Oxidation of water supply refractory
species by ozone with ultraviolet radiation. Report EPA-600/2-80-110, US,
environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA.
18. Tech Commentary (1996) Advanced Oxidation Processes for treatment of
industrial wastewater. An EPRI Community Environmetal Center Publ.
19. Gottschalk C, Libra J A, Saupe A (2000) Ozonation of water and wastewater.
Wiley-VCH.
20. Eren Z, Ince NH (2010) Sonolytic and sonocatalytic degradation of azo dyes by
low and high frequency ultrasound. J Hazard Mater 177: 1019-1024.
21. Naddeo V, Belgiorno V, Napoli R M A (2007) Behaviour of natural organic
matter during ultrasonic irradiation. Desalination 210, no. 1-3: 175-182.
22. Mehrvar M, Anderson W A, Moo-young M (2001) Photocatalytic degradation
of aqueous organic solvents in the presence of hydroxyl radical scavengers.
International Journal of Photoenergy 3: 187 - 191.
23. Landi M, Naddeo V, Belgiorno V (2010) Influence of ultrasound on phenol
removal by adsorption on granular activated carbon. Desalination and Water
Treatment 23, no. 1-3: 181–186.
24. Naddeo V, Meriç S, Kassinos D, Belgiorno V, Guida M (2009) Fate of
pharmaceuticals in contaminated urban wastewater effluent under ultrasonic
irradiation. Water Res 43: 4019-4027.
25. Naddeo V, Ricco D, Scannapieco D, Belgiorno V (2012) Degradation of
antibiotics in wastewater during sonolysis, ozonation, and their simultaneous
application: Operating conditions effects and processes evaluation.
International Journal of Photoenergy, 2012, art.ID 624270: 1-7.
26. Naddeo V, Belgiorno V, Ricco D, Kassinos D (2009) Degradation of diclofenac
during sonolysis, ozonation and their simultaneous application. Ultrason
Sonochem 16: 790-794.
27. Munter R (2001) Advanced Oxidation Processes – current status and prospects.
Proceedings Estonian Academy of Science (Series: Chemical) 50: 59-80.
28. SES (1994) The UV/oxidation handbook. Solarchem Environmental Systems,
Markham, Ontario, Canada.
29. Peyton G.R, Glaze W.H. (1982) Destruction of pollutants in water with ozone
in combination with ultraviolet radiation. 2. Natural trihalomethane precursors.
Environmental Science Technology 16: 454-458.
Volume 4 • Issue 8 • 1000208
Citation: Cesaro A, Naddeo V, Belgiorno V (2013) Wastewater Treatment by Combination of Advanced Oxidation Processes and Conventional
Biological Systems. J Bioremed Biodeg 4: 208. doi:10.4172/2155-6199.1000208
30. Gogate P.R, Pandit A.B (2004) A review of imperative technologies for
wastewater treatment I: oxidation technologies at ambient conditions.
Advanced Environmental Resource 8: 501-551.
31. Araña J, Tello Rendón E, Doña Rodríguez JM, Herrera Melián JA, González
Díaz O, et al. (2001) Highly concentrated phenolic wastewater treatment by
the photo-Fenton reaction, mechanism study by FTIR-ATR. Chemosphere 44:
1017-1023.
32. Vogelpohl A (2007) Applications of AOPs in wastewater treatment. Water Sci
Technol 55: 207-211.
33. Rizzo L (2010) Wastewater treatment by solar driven advanced oxidation
processes. Proceedings Summer School "Water, wastewater and soil treatment
by advanced oxidation processes". July, 6-8, Salerno, Italy.
34. Naddeo V, Landi M. (2010) AOPs technologies. An overview. Proceedings
Summer School "Water, wastewater and soil treatment by advanced oxidation
processes". July, 6-8, Salerno, Italy.
35. Jones P.H, Prasad D, Heskins M, Morgan M.H, Guillet J.E (1974)
Biodegradability of photodegraded polymers. Environmental Science and
Technology 8: 919-925.
36. Liu D, Strachan W. M. J, Thomson K. Kwasniewska K (1981) Determination of
the biodegradability of organic compounds. Environ Sci Technol 15: 788-793.
37. Suzuki J, Hudushima K, Suzuki S (1978) Effect of ozone treatment upon
biodegradability of water-soluble polymers. Environmental Science and
Technology 12: 1180-1183.
38. Struijs J, van den Berg R (1994) Standardized biodegradability tests:
extrapolation to aerobic environments. Water Research 29: 255-262.
39. OECD (1993) OECD Guidelines for testing of chemicals “Ready
Biodegradability”
40. Pedrazzani R (2010) Biodegradabilty tests. Proceedings Summer School
"Water, wastewater and soil treatment by advanced oxidation processes". July,
6-9, Salerno, Italy.
41. Cossu R, Raga R (2008) Test methods for assessing the biological stability of
biodegradable waste. Waste Manag 28: 381-388.
42. Marco A, Esplugas S, Saum G (1997) How and why combine chemical and
biological processes for wastewater treatment. Water Science and Technology
35: 321-327.
43. Carberry JB, Benzing TM (1991) Peroxide preoxidation of recalcitrant toxic
waste to enhance biodegradation. Water Science and Technology 23: 367-376.
44. Barton DA, Drake EP (1994) Biotreatability of blow heat condensates with and
without hydrogen peroxide pretreatment. Water Science and Technology 29:
229-238.
45. Mantzavinos D, Psillakis E (2004) Enhancement of biodegradabilità of
industrial wastewaters by chimica oxidation pre-treatment. Journal of Chemical
Technology and Biotechnology 79: 431-454.
46. Scott JP, Ollis DF (1995) Integration of chemical and biological oxidation
processes for water treatment: review and recommendations. Environmental
Progress 14: 88-103.
47. Kastaned F, Maleterova Y, Kastanek P (2007) Combination of advanced
oxidation and/or reductive dehalogenation and biodegradation for the
decontamination of waters contaminated with chlorinated organic compounds.
Separation Science and Technology 42: 1613-1625.
48. Farré MJ, Doménech X, Peral J (2006) Assessment of photo-Fenton and
biological treatment coupling for Diuron and Linuron removal from water. Water
Res 40: 2533-2540.
49. Zapata A, Malato S, Sánchez- Pérez J.A, Oller I, Maldonado MI (2010) Scale-up
strategy for a combined solar photo-Fenton/biological system for remediation of
pesticide-contaminated water. Catalysis Today 151: 100-106.
50. Mandal T, Dasgupta D, Mandal S, Datta S (2010) Treatment of leather industry
wastewater by aerobic biological and Fenton oxidation process. J Hazard
Mater 180: 204-211.
51. Di Iaconi C, Del Moro G, De Sanctis M, Rossetti S (2010) A chemically
enhanced biological process for lowering operative costs and solid residues of
industrial recalcitrant wastewater treatment. Water Research 44: 3635-3644.
52. Feng F, Xu Z, Li X, You W, Zhen Y (2010) Advanced treatment of dyeing
J Bioremed Biodeg
ISSN: 2155-6199 JBRBD, an open access journal
Page 7 of 8
wastewater towards reuse by the combined Fenton oxidation and membrane
bioreactor process. J Environ Sci (China) 22: 1657-1665.
53. Oller I, Malato S, Sánchez-Pérez JA, Maldonado MI, Gernjak W, et al. (2007)
Pre-industrial-scale combined solar photo-Fenton and immobilized biomass
activated-sludge biotreatment. Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Research
46:7467-7475.
54. Coleman H.M, Chiang K, Amal R (2005) Effects of Ag and Pt on photocatalytic
degradation of endocrine disrupting chemicals in water. Chemical Engineering
Journal 113: 65-72.
55. Belgiorno V, Rizzo L, Fatta D, Della Rocca C, Lofrano G, et al. (2007) Review
on endocrine disrupting-emerging compounds in urban wastewater: occurrence
and removal by photocatalysis and ultrasonic irradiation for wastewater reuse.
Desalination 215, no. 1-3: 166-176.
56. Naddeo V, Belgiorno V, Kassinos D, Mantzavinos D, Meric S (2010)
Ultrasonic degradation, mineralization and detoxification of diclofenac in water:
optimization of operating parameters. Ultrason Sonochem 17: 179-185.
57. De Bel E, Dewulf J, Witte BD, Van Langenhove H, Janssen C (2009) Influence
of pH on the sonolysis of ciprofloxacin: Biodegradability, ecotoxicity and
antibiotic activity of its degradation products. Chemosphere 77: 291-295.
58. Sangave PC, Pandit AB (2004) Ultrasound pre-treatment for enhanced
biodegradability of the distillery wastewater. Ultrason Sonochem 11: 197-203.
59. Sangave PC, Pandit AB (2006) Ultrasound and enzyme assisted biodegradation
of distillery wastewater. J Environ Manage 80: 36-46.
60. Naddeo V, Belgiorno V, Landi M, Zarra T, e Napoli R.M.A (2009) Effect
of sonolysis on waste activated sludge solubilisation and anaerobic
biodegradability. Desalination 249, no. 2: 762–767.
61. Cesaro A, Naddeo V, Amodio V, Belgiorno V (2012) Enhanced biogas
production from anaerobic codigestion of solid waste by sonolysis. Ultrason
Sonochem 19: 596-600.
62. Cesaro A, Belgiorno V (2013) Sonolysis and ozonation as pretreatment for
anaerobic digestion of solid organic waste. Ultrason Sonochem 20: 931-936.
63. He S C, Zhu C P, Shan M L, Feng R (2005) Recent advances in wastewater
treatment with ultrasonic, ozone method. Technical Acoustics 24: 173–177.
64. Sangave PC, Gogate PR, Pandit AB (2007) Ultrasound and ozone assisted
biological degradation of thermally pretreated and anaerobically pretreated
distillery wastewater. Chemosphere 68: 42-50.
65. Sangave PC, Gogate PR, Pandit AB (2007) Combination of ozonation
with conventional aerobic oxidation for distillery wastewater treatment.
Chemosphere 68: 32-41.
66. Di Iaconi C, Ramadori R, Lopez A (2009) The effect of ozone on tannery
wastewater biological treatment at demonstrative scale. Bioresour Technol
100: 6121-6124.
67. Lotito A.M, Fratino U, BErgna G, Di Iaconi C (2012) Integrated biological and
ozone treatment of printing textile wastewater. Chemical Engineering Journal
195-196: 261-269.
68. Narkis N, Schneider-Rotel M (1980) Evaluation of ozone induced
biodegradability of wastewater treatment plant effluent. Water Research 14:
929-939.
69. Alvares A B C, Diaper C, Parsons S A (2001) Partial Oxidation of Hydrolysed and
Unhydrolysed Textile Azo Dyes by Ozone and the Effect on Biodegradability.
Process Safety and Environmental Protection 79, no. 2: 103-108.
70. Hsu YC, Yang HC, Chen JH (2004) The enhancement of the biodegradability
of phenolic solution using preozonation based on high ozone utilization.
Chemosphere 56: 149-158.
71. Bijan L, Mohseni M (2005) Integrated ozone and biotreatment of pulp mill
effluent and changes in biodegradability and molecular weight distribution of
organic compounds. Water Res 39: 3763-3772.
72. Arslan-Alaton I, Caglayan AE (2006) Toxicity and biodegradability assessment
of raw and ozonated procaine penicillin G formulation effluent. Ecotoxicol
Environ Saf 63: 131-140.
73. Coelho AD, Sans C, Agüera A, Gómez MJ, Esplugas S, et al. (2009) Effects of
ozone pre-treatment on diclofenac: intermediates, biodegradability and toxicity
assessment. Sci Total Environ 407: 3572-3578.
Volume 4 • Issue 8 • 1000208
Citation: Cesaro A, Naddeo V, Belgiorno V (2013) Wastewater Treatment by Combination of Advanced Oxidation Processes and Conventional
Biological Systems. J Bioremed Biodeg 4: 208. doi:10.4172/2155-6199.1000208

Page 8 of 8

74. Somensi C A, Simionatto E L, Bertoli S L, Wisniewski Jr A, Radetski C M (2010) 75. Xiong Z, Cheng X, Sun D (2011) Pretreatment of heterocyclic pesticide
Use of ozone in a pilot-scale plant for textile wastewater pre-treatment: Physico- wastewater using ultrasonic/ozone combined process. J Environ Sci 23: 725-
chemical efficiency, degradation by-products identification and environmental 730.
toxicity of treated wastewater. Journal of Hazardous Materials 175: 235-240.

J Bioremed Biodeg
ISSN: 2155-6199 JBRBD, an open access journal Volume 4 • Issue 8 • 1000208