- Email: [email protected]
Examples of Full-Scale Installations
CHAPTE R 8
Examples of Full-Scale Installations There is an interest in the use of the membrane bioreactor (MBR) process in municipal and industrial wastewater treatment (Mauchauffée et al., 2012). In the year 2007, there were 70–80 MBR facilities in Germany, 17 of which were in municipal wastewater treatment plants and three in paper mills (Pinnekamp, 2007). Simstich and Öller (2010) reported that in Europe, nine MBR plants are operating in paper mills. The operating costs of the MBR process are higher compared to the conventional version with a final clarifier (Möbius, 2002; Möbius and Helble, 2004), but still, it is gaining popularity. The advantages for use in the paper industry are (Judd, 2011): • smaller space requirements • higher sludge age and MLSS (mixed liquor suspended solids) concentration • better effluent quality MBR is used in the paper industry as end-of-pipe technology and also as a process integrated measure for the reduction of harmful substances in the water circuit. A typical problem of the membrane filtration of paper industry wastewaters is calcium scaling. Calcium carbonate is used in paper production as a filler and coating pigment. As recovered paper is commonly used as a raw material, high concentrations of calcium are found in the water circuit. Mills producing board or corrugated paper, in particular, usually have almost closed water circuits with low specific effluent volumes of <5 L/kg paper. This combination of dissolved calcium from the raw material and high process water reuse rates results in high water hardness and problems with scaling and precipitation. The filtration processes are prone to scaling; therefore, measures have to be examined for successful use of membrane technologies in the paper industry. MBR is a sustainable technology, particularly in terms of effluent quality and economical aspects. Membrane processes are being used as a key technology in the treatment of pulp and paper industry wastewaters (Mauchauffée, 2012). The benefits associated with this process are reduced water consumption, recovery and recycling of valuable compounds, and reduced environmental impact (Simstich and Öller, 2010). Use of membrane processes is expected to increase as the industry seeks to produce new products from the compounds present in the process and waste streams. Recovery, fractionation, and concentration of these compounds by membrane processes are found to be very effective. Furthermore, due to stricter environmental regulation, the need to close water cycles and increase the use of membrane processes at pulp and paper mills will increase (BREF, 2013). The examples of membrane applications at Pulp and Paper Industry. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-811099-7.00008-3 Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
181
182 Chapter 8 industrial scale have shown that membranes can be used cost-effectively. For further improving the cost efficiency, there is a need to develop novel membranes with reduced fouling tendency, improved fractionation capacity, and improved resistance to conditions dominant in pulp and paper mills and in wood-based biorefinery processes. Membrane treatment serves to optimize loop closure and therefore helps to reduce freshwater intake as well as wastewater treatment. Different types of modules have been used. These are spiral-wound, cross rotational (CR), or vibratory shear enhanced modules. The latter two are basically circular flat sheet arrangements, where high shear or cross-flow is created through rotation or vibration (Nyström et al., 2005). These module configurations are used for cleaning of internal circuits when a lot of fiber and suspended matter are present. Spiral-wound modules are mostly installed in typical posttreatment configurations when suspended and colloidal matter has been reduced down to very low levels in preceding treatment steps. Full-scale installations regarding membrane filtration and advanced oxidation process (AOP) technologies are described as follows. In a paper mill in Finland, paper machine clear filtrate is treated with ultrafiltration using CR filters (Metso PaperChem Oy) and subsequent nanofiltration with spiral-wound modules (Sutela, 2001). In a newsprint paper mill, nanofiltration treatment of total effluent was installed (Lien et al., 1995). Since no biological treatment had been installed, effluent was treated by physicochemical pretreatment and several prefiltration steps before nanofiltration in order to reduce fouling and clogging. In one German mill producing newspaper from 100% recovered paper, nanofiltration with spiralwound modules has been used for tertiary effluent treatment (Schirm et al., 2002). Nanofiltration was selected in order to reduce residual chemical oxygen demand (COD), adsorbable organic halides (AOX), color, and salinity for direct discharge or partial loop closure. In Germany, another full-scale installation was started in 2008 in the production of cardboard and packaging paper using an MBR and reverse osmosis for the production of around 27 m³/h reclamation water for reuse in the mill (90% recovery). The advantage of nanofiltration in the recovery of water for recirculation is mainly that the clean water can be used, even in the most demanding places in the paper mill. With nanofiltration, the reductions in color, COD, and AOX were 90%, 70–90%, and 60–97%, respectively. The reductions in multivalent metals were more than 90% (Nyström et al., 2005; Schirm et al., 2002). Cox (2007) reported that a combination of ultrafiltration–nanofiltration–reverse osmosis was used in a pilot system to produce reclamation water for the irrigation of crops in Australia. The drawbacks in the use of commercially available nanofiltration modules are the requirement for heavy pretreatment, for example, the addition of chemicals for water conditioning, clarification, and filtration for removal of suspended solids (Mänttäri et al., 2006).
Examples of Full-Scale Installations 183 In case of the German newspaper mill using nanofiltration, two stages and filtration are used for pretreatment. MBR technology serves as modern alternative because of superior quality of ultrafiltration filtrate. A combination of MBR + nanofiltration/reverse osmosis therefore appears promising for water recycling in pulp and paper industry. Recovery rates of up to 90–93% (volume concentration factor 10–15) have been reported for the nanofiltration treatment of biologically pretreated effluents, depending on wastewater load and membrane type (Mänttäri et al., 2006). Still, the combination of membrane technology and high inorganic content, which remains present in pretreated effluents of paperboard mills, needs to be addressed in detail, since recovery rates and treatment costs are interconnected closely. Economic evaluation of nanofiltration treatment of groundwood mill effluent water has shown that depending on flux and pretreatment, associated cost for reclaimed nanofiltration permeate varied from around 0.9–1.4 €/m³. The Irving Pulp and Paper in New Brunswick, a 950 tons/day facility, has been operating for 15 years without the requirement for a biological wastewater treatment system (Hodgson et al., 1998) due to membrane usage. There are not many full-scale installations regarding AOP technologies (Karat, 2013). Examples of ozonation in combination with subsequent biofiltration stage have been reported (Schmidt and Lange, 2000; Kaindl. 2010). Tertiary biofilters have been installed after the ozonation to ensure that all biodegradable molecules that are produced as by-products during oxidation are removed. Hence, the COD removal can be increased without simultaneously increasing the biological oxidation demand (BOD). The first realization of a wastewater treatment plant using an ozone step and then a biofiltration stage has been performed for the German paper mill producing newspapers and magazines in Ettringen (Germany) in 1999 (Schmidt and Lange, 2000). This mill aimed to increase its production capacity to 100% (to 560,000 tons/year). State-of-the-art technology was used in the current existing two-tiered activated sludge facility, but the system was already working at maximum performance, which is why a subsequent tertiary treatment stage was installed. The treatment was first evaluated in laboratory, then in pilot scale, and later WEDECO was entrusted with the construction of the full-scale facility. Two ozone generators were used in parallel having a capacity of 50-kg ozone/h at 12 wt% ozone and a specific energy consumption of 8.7 kWh/kg ozone. COD at discharge point (outlet of biofiltration) could be reduced to around 100 mg/L at a specific ozone dosage of 0.5 kg ozone/kg COD at full utilization of the ozone facility. The BOD was maintained at 10 mg/L, and the operating cost for ozone production and introduction was 0.10–0.25 EUR/m3 (Schmidt and Lange, 2000). Ozonation in combination with biofiltration was installed at the thermomechanical pulp paper mill SCA Graphic Laakirchen AG, located in Austria (Kaindl. 2010). A paper mill producing 500,000 tons of graphic paper (SC and offset paper) annually has an onsite wastewater treatment plant. It treats 7,240,000 m³ of wastewater per year. The treatment is done first
184 Chapter 8 mechanically, then biologically, and then by ozonation. Increased paper production capacity resulted in higher COD load in the mill effluent, whereas production of higher amount of brighter products resulted in very poor biodegradability. Because of this, the biological capacity of the wastewater treatment plant needed to be increased and extra measures were required for increasing the COD reduction. The implementation of one moving bed biofilm reactor (MBBR) on a commercial scale having a volume of 1230 m³ was performed in the year 2000, followed by another MBBR of 2475 m³ in 2002. An ozonation step having a capacity of 75 kg ozone/h was added in 2004 for meeting higher COD reduction demands during the production of brighter paper and thus keeping the given outflow limits. Addition of a MBBR before the existing activated sludge step gives the following benefits: • cost benefits when increasing biological capacity as higher COD volume loads of MBBRs allow smaller reactors than the normal ones for activated sludge plants; • a relief of strain from the activated sludge step by biological degradation in the MBBR; • equalization of peaks in the COD load and toxic effects before affecting the activated sludge step; and • a stable volume sludge index below 100 mL/g in combination with an optimization of the activated sludge step allows good sludge separation, which is an important condition for further treatment with ozone. Ozonation and subsequent biofiltration pretreated wastewater provide the following benefits: • reduction of hard COD unobtainable by traditional treatment methods; • control of COD reduction in a very wide range and therefore removal of COD peaks; • reduction of treatment costs by using combination of ozonation and biofiltration; and • reduction in color in the ozonated wastewater. The MBBR step was found to be very simple to operate. Better control of the COD removal in the ozone step allowed for economical usage, which resulted in acceptable operation costs in relation to the paper production. Kaindl (2010) reported that the total investment cost for the installation of the ozone step was 3.508 MEUR, and operational cost for ozonation plus biofiltration was 1.33 EUR per kg of eliminated COD. Ozonation has also been successfully applied at an industrial scale to reuse paper mill effluents (Öeller and Offermanns, 2002).
References BREF, 2013. Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC): Reference Document on Best Available Techniques in the Pulp and Paper Industry (Final Draft). European Commission. Cox, M., 2007. In: Cox, M., Négré, P., Yurramendi, L. (Eds.), A Guide Book on the Treatment of Effluents from the Mining/Metallurgy, Paper, plating and Textile Industries. Projet Européen GIRT-CT-2002–05097. Inasmet Tecnalia. ISBN: 84-95520-14-1. Hodgson, A., Hitzroth, A., Premdas, P., Hodson, P., Duff, S., 1998. Effect of tertiary coagulation and flocculation treatment on effluent quality from a bleached kraft mill. TAPPI Journal 81 (2), 166–172.
Examples of Full-Scale Installations 185 Judd, S., 2011. The MBR Book: Principles and Applications of Membrane Bioreactors for Water and Wastewater Treatment, second ed. Elsevier Science. Kaindl, N., 2010. Upgrading of an activated sludge wastewater treatment plant by adding a moving bed biofilm reactor as pretreatment and ozonation followed by biofiltration for enhanced COD reduction: design and operation experience. Water Science and Technology 62, 2710–2719. Karat, I., 2013. Advanced Oxidation Processes for Removal of COD from Pulp and Paper Mill Effluents a Technical, Economical and Environmental Evaluation (Master of science thesis. Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden. Lien, L., Simonis, D., 1995. Case histories of two large nanofiltration systems reclaiming effluent from pulp and paper mills for reuse. In: Proc. TAPPI 1995 Int. Environmental Conference. TAPPI Press, Atlanta USA, pp. 1023–1027. Book 2. Mänttäri, M., Viitikko, K., Nyström, M., 2006. Nanofiltration of biologically treated effluents from the pulp and paper industry. Journal of Membrane Science 272, 152–160. Mauchauffée, S., Denieul, M.P., Simstich, B., 2012. New Technologies or Innovative Treatment Lines for Reliable Water Treatment for P&P and Minimization of Waste Production VEO, PTS, ENV, UCM, HOL, WED. www. aquafit4use.eu/…/AquaFit4Use - Innovative Treatment Lines. Möbius, C.H., 2002. Waste Water of the Pulp and Paper Industry, third ed. Revision December 2008. Augsburg. http://www.cm-consult.de. Mobius, C.H., Helble, A., 2004. Combined ozonation and biofilm treatment for reuse of paper mill wastewaters. Water Science and Technology 49, 319–323. Nyström, M., Nuortila-Jokinen, J.M.K., Mänttäri, M.J., 2005. Nanofiltration – principles and appplications. In: Schäfer, A.I., Fane, A.G., Waite, T.D. (Eds.), Nanofiltration in the Pulp and Paper Industry. Elsevier Advanced Technology, Oxford. ISBN: 1-85617-405-0. Chapter 14. Öeller, H.J., Offermanns, U., 2002. Successful start-up of the world’s 1st ozone-based effluent recirculation system in a paper mill. In: NJD, G. (Ed.), Proceedings of the International Conference Advances in Ozone Science and Engineering: environmental processes and technological applications, Hong Kong, 15–16 April 2002, pp. 365–372. Pinnekamp, J., 2007. Das Membranbelebungsverfahren bei der Abwasserbehandlung – Anwendung und Perspektiven (The membrane-bioreactor technology for wastewater treatment – Utilisation and prospects). In: Presented at the 7th Aachener Tagung Wasser und Membranen, Aachen. Schirm, R., Paulitschek, M., Rösler, H.W., 2002. Einsatz der Membrantechnologie in der Papierindustrie. In: Wasserkreisläufe in der Papiererzeugung. PTS, München, pp. 09-1–09-20. Schmidt, T., Lange, S., 2000. Treatment of paper mill effluent by the use of ozone and biological systems: large scale application at Lang paper, Ettringen (Germany). In: TAPPI 2000 Environmental Conference & Trade Fair Proceedings, Denver, 6–10 May 2000. Simstich, B., Öller, H.-J., 2010. Membrane technology for the future treatment of paper mill effluents – chances and challenges of further system closure. Water Science and Technology 62 (9), 2190–2197. Sutela, T., 2001. Operating experience with membrane technology used for circuit water treatment in different paper mills. In: Grossmann, H., Demel, I. (Eds.), PTS Environmental Technology SymposiumPTS Symposium WU-SY 50, 108, pp. 11-1–11-17.
Examples of Full-Scale Installations There is an interest in the use of the membrane bioreactor (MBR) process in municipal and industrial wastewater treatment (Mauchauffée et al., 2012). In the year 2007, there were 70–80 MBR facilities in Germany, 17 of which were in municipal wastewater treatment plants and three in paper mills (Pinnekamp, 2007). Simstich and Öller (2010) reported that in Europe, nine MBR plants are operating in paper mills. The operating costs of the MBR process are higher compared to the conventional version with a final clarifier (Möbius, 2002; Möbius and Helble, 2004), but still, it is gaining popularity. The advantages for use in the paper industry are (Judd, 2011): • smaller space requirements • higher sludge age and MLSS (mixed liquor suspended solids) concentration • better effluent quality MBR is used in the paper industry as end-of-pipe technology and also as a process integrated measure for the reduction of harmful substances in the water circuit. A typical problem of the membrane filtration of paper industry wastewaters is calcium scaling. Calcium carbonate is used in paper production as a filler and coating pigment. As recovered paper is commonly used as a raw material, high concentrations of calcium are found in the water circuit. Mills producing board or corrugated paper, in particular, usually have almost closed water circuits with low specific effluent volumes of <5 L/kg paper. This combination of dissolved calcium from the raw material and high process water reuse rates results in high water hardness and problems with scaling and precipitation. The filtration processes are prone to scaling; therefore, measures have to be examined for successful use of membrane technologies in the paper industry. MBR is a sustainable technology, particularly in terms of effluent quality and economical aspects. Membrane processes are being used as a key technology in the treatment of pulp and paper industry wastewaters (Mauchauffée, 2012). The benefits associated with this process are reduced water consumption, recovery and recycling of valuable compounds, and reduced environmental impact (Simstich and Öller, 2010). Use of membrane processes is expected to increase as the industry seeks to produce new products from the compounds present in the process and waste streams. Recovery, fractionation, and concentration of these compounds by membrane processes are found to be very effective. Furthermore, due to stricter environmental regulation, the need to close water cycles and increase the use of membrane processes at pulp and paper mills will increase (BREF, 2013). The examples of membrane applications at Pulp and Paper Industry. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-811099-7.00008-3 Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
181
182 Chapter 8 industrial scale have shown that membranes can be used cost-effectively. For further improving the cost efficiency, there is a need to develop novel membranes with reduced fouling tendency, improved fractionation capacity, and improved resistance to conditions dominant in pulp and paper mills and in wood-based biorefinery processes. Membrane treatment serves to optimize loop closure and therefore helps to reduce freshwater intake as well as wastewater treatment. Different types of modules have been used. These are spiral-wound, cross rotational (CR), or vibratory shear enhanced modules. The latter two are basically circular flat sheet arrangements, where high shear or cross-flow is created through rotation or vibration (Nyström et al., 2005). These module configurations are used for cleaning of internal circuits when a lot of fiber and suspended matter are present. Spiral-wound modules are mostly installed in typical posttreatment configurations when suspended and colloidal matter has been reduced down to very low levels in preceding treatment steps. Full-scale installations regarding membrane filtration and advanced oxidation process (AOP) technologies are described as follows. In a paper mill in Finland, paper machine clear filtrate is treated with ultrafiltration using CR filters (Metso PaperChem Oy) and subsequent nanofiltration with spiral-wound modules (Sutela, 2001). In a newsprint paper mill, nanofiltration treatment of total effluent was installed (Lien et al., 1995). Since no biological treatment had been installed, effluent was treated by physicochemical pretreatment and several prefiltration steps before nanofiltration in order to reduce fouling and clogging. In one German mill producing newspaper from 100% recovered paper, nanofiltration with spiralwound modules has been used for tertiary effluent treatment (Schirm et al., 2002). Nanofiltration was selected in order to reduce residual chemical oxygen demand (COD), adsorbable organic halides (AOX), color, and salinity for direct discharge or partial loop closure. In Germany, another full-scale installation was started in 2008 in the production of cardboard and packaging paper using an MBR and reverse osmosis for the production of around 27 m³/h reclamation water for reuse in the mill (90% recovery). The advantage of nanofiltration in the recovery of water for recirculation is mainly that the clean water can be used, even in the most demanding places in the paper mill. With nanofiltration, the reductions in color, COD, and AOX were 90%, 70–90%, and 60–97%, respectively. The reductions in multivalent metals were more than 90% (Nyström et al., 2005; Schirm et al., 2002). Cox (2007) reported that a combination of ultrafiltration–nanofiltration–reverse osmosis was used in a pilot system to produce reclamation water for the irrigation of crops in Australia. The drawbacks in the use of commercially available nanofiltration modules are the requirement for heavy pretreatment, for example, the addition of chemicals for water conditioning, clarification, and filtration for removal of suspended solids (Mänttäri et al., 2006).
Examples of Full-Scale Installations 183 In case of the German newspaper mill using nanofiltration, two stages and filtration are used for pretreatment. MBR technology serves as modern alternative because of superior quality of ultrafiltration filtrate. A combination of MBR + nanofiltration/reverse osmosis therefore appears promising for water recycling in pulp and paper industry. Recovery rates of up to 90–93% (volume concentration factor 10–15) have been reported for the nanofiltration treatment of biologically pretreated effluents, depending on wastewater load and membrane type (Mänttäri et al., 2006). Still, the combination of membrane technology and high inorganic content, which remains present in pretreated effluents of paperboard mills, needs to be addressed in detail, since recovery rates and treatment costs are interconnected closely. Economic evaluation of nanofiltration treatment of groundwood mill effluent water has shown that depending on flux and pretreatment, associated cost for reclaimed nanofiltration permeate varied from around 0.9–1.4 €/m³. The Irving Pulp and Paper in New Brunswick, a 950 tons/day facility, has been operating for 15 years without the requirement for a biological wastewater treatment system (Hodgson et al., 1998) due to membrane usage. There are not many full-scale installations regarding AOP technologies (Karat, 2013). Examples of ozonation in combination with subsequent biofiltration stage have been reported (Schmidt and Lange, 2000; Kaindl. 2010). Tertiary biofilters have been installed after the ozonation to ensure that all biodegradable molecules that are produced as by-products during oxidation are removed. Hence, the COD removal can be increased without simultaneously increasing the biological oxidation demand (BOD). The first realization of a wastewater treatment plant using an ozone step and then a biofiltration stage has been performed for the German paper mill producing newspapers and magazines in Ettringen (Germany) in 1999 (Schmidt and Lange, 2000). This mill aimed to increase its production capacity to 100% (to 560,000 tons/year). State-of-the-art technology was used in the current existing two-tiered activated sludge facility, but the system was already working at maximum performance, which is why a subsequent tertiary treatment stage was installed. The treatment was first evaluated in laboratory, then in pilot scale, and later WEDECO was entrusted with the construction of the full-scale facility. Two ozone generators were used in parallel having a capacity of 50-kg ozone/h at 12 wt% ozone and a specific energy consumption of 8.7 kWh/kg ozone. COD at discharge point (outlet of biofiltration) could be reduced to around 100 mg/L at a specific ozone dosage of 0.5 kg ozone/kg COD at full utilization of the ozone facility. The BOD was maintained at 10 mg/L, and the operating cost for ozone production and introduction was 0.10–0.25 EUR/m3 (Schmidt and Lange, 2000). Ozonation in combination with biofiltration was installed at the thermomechanical pulp paper mill SCA Graphic Laakirchen AG, located in Austria (Kaindl. 2010). A paper mill producing 500,000 tons of graphic paper (SC and offset paper) annually has an onsite wastewater treatment plant. It treats 7,240,000 m³ of wastewater per year. The treatment is done first
184 Chapter 8 mechanically, then biologically, and then by ozonation. Increased paper production capacity resulted in higher COD load in the mill effluent, whereas production of higher amount of brighter products resulted in very poor biodegradability. Because of this, the biological capacity of the wastewater treatment plant needed to be increased and extra measures were required for increasing the COD reduction. The implementation of one moving bed biofilm reactor (MBBR) on a commercial scale having a volume of 1230 m³ was performed in the year 2000, followed by another MBBR of 2475 m³ in 2002. An ozonation step having a capacity of 75 kg ozone/h was added in 2004 for meeting higher COD reduction demands during the production of brighter paper and thus keeping the given outflow limits. Addition of a MBBR before the existing activated sludge step gives the following benefits: • cost benefits when increasing biological capacity as higher COD volume loads of MBBRs allow smaller reactors than the normal ones for activated sludge plants; • a relief of strain from the activated sludge step by biological degradation in the MBBR; • equalization of peaks in the COD load and toxic effects before affecting the activated sludge step; and • a stable volume sludge index below 100 mL/g in combination with an optimization of the activated sludge step allows good sludge separation, which is an important condition for further treatment with ozone. Ozonation and subsequent biofiltration pretreated wastewater provide the following benefits: • reduction of hard COD unobtainable by traditional treatment methods; • control of COD reduction in a very wide range and therefore removal of COD peaks; • reduction of treatment costs by using combination of ozonation and biofiltration; and • reduction in color in the ozonated wastewater. The MBBR step was found to be very simple to operate. Better control of the COD removal in the ozone step allowed for economical usage, which resulted in acceptable operation costs in relation to the paper production. Kaindl (2010) reported that the total investment cost for the installation of the ozone step was 3.508 MEUR, and operational cost for ozonation plus biofiltration was 1.33 EUR per kg of eliminated COD. Ozonation has also been successfully applied at an industrial scale to reuse paper mill effluents (Öeller and Offermanns, 2002).
References BREF, 2013. Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC): Reference Document on Best Available Techniques in the Pulp and Paper Industry (Final Draft). European Commission. Cox, M., 2007. In: Cox, M., Négré, P., Yurramendi, L. (Eds.), A Guide Book on the Treatment of Effluents from the Mining/Metallurgy, Paper, plating and Textile Industries. Projet Européen GIRT-CT-2002–05097. Inasmet Tecnalia. ISBN: 84-95520-14-1. Hodgson, A., Hitzroth, A., Premdas, P., Hodson, P., Duff, S., 1998. Effect of tertiary coagulation and flocculation treatment on effluent quality from a bleached kraft mill. TAPPI Journal 81 (2), 166–172.
Examples of Full-Scale Installations 185 Judd, S., 2011. The MBR Book: Principles and Applications of Membrane Bioreactors for Water and Wastewater Treatment, second ed. Elsevier Science. Kaindl, N., 2010. Upgrading of an activated sludge wastewater treatment plant by adding a moving bed biofilm reactor as pretreatment and ozonation followed by biofiltration for enhanced COD reduction: design and operation experience. Water Science and Technology 62, 2710–2719. Karat, I., 2013. Advanced Oxidation Processes for Removal of COD from Pulp and Paper Mill Effluents a Technical, Economical and Environmental Evaluation (Master of science thesis. Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden. Lien, L., Simonis, D., 1995. Case histories of two large nanofiltration systems reclaiming effluent from pulp and paper mills for reuse. In: Proc. TAPPI 1995 Int. Environmental Conference. TAPPI Press, Atlanta USA, pp. 1023–1027. Book 2. Mänttäri, M., Viitikko, K., Nyström, M., 2006. Nanofiltration of biologically treated effluents from the pulp and paper industry. Journal of Membrane Science 272, 152–160. Mauchauffée, S., Denieul, M.P., Simstich, B., 2012. New Technologies or Innovative Treatment Lines for Reliable Water Treatment for P&P and Minimization of Waste Production VEO, PTS, ENV, UCM, HOL, WED. www. aquafit4use.eu/…/AquaFit4Use - Innovative Treatment Lines. Möbius, C.H., 2002. Waste Water of the Pulp and Paper Industry, third ed. Revision December 2008. Augsburg. http://www.cm-consult.de. Mobius, C.H., Helble, A., 2004. Combined ozonation and biofilm treatment for reuse of paper mill wastewaters. Water Science and Technology 49, 319–323. Nyström, M., Nuortila-Jokinen, J.M.K., Mänttäri, M.J., 2005. Nanofiltration – principles and appplications. In: Schäfer, A.I., Fane, A.G., Waite, T.D. (Eds.), Nanofiltration in the Pulp and Paper Industry. Elsevier Advanced Technology, Oxford. ISBN: 1-85617-405-0. Chapter 14. Öeller, H.J., Offermanns, U., 2002. Successful start-up of the world’s 1st ozone-based effluent recirculation system in a paper mill. In: NJD, G. (Ed.), Proceedings of the International Conference Advances in Ozone Science and Engineering: environmental processes and technological applications, Hong Kong, 15–16 April 2002, pp. 365–372. Pinnekamp, J., 2007. Das Membranbelebungsverfahren bei der Abwasserbehandlung – Anwendung und Perspektiven (The membrane-bioreactor technology for wastewater treatment – Utilisation and prospects). In: Presented at the 7th Aachener Tagung Wasser und Membranen, Aachen. Schirm, R., Paulitschek, M., Rösler, H.W., 2002. Einsatz der Membrantechnologie in der Papierindustrie. In: Wasserkreisläufe in der Papiererzeugung. PTS, München, pp. 09-1–09-20. Schmidt, T., Lange, S., 2000. Treatment of paper mill effluent by the use of ozone and biological systems: large scale application at Lang paper, Ettringen (Germany). In: TAPPI 2000 Environmental Conference & Trade Fair Proceedings, Denver, 6–10 May 2000. Simstich, B., Öller, H.-J., 2010. Membrane technology for the future treatment of paper mill effluents – chances and challenges of further system closure. Water Science and Technology 62 (9), 2190–2197. Sutela, T., 2001. Operating experience with membrane technology used for circuit water treatment in different paper mills. In: Grossmann, H., Demel, I. (Eds.), PTS Environmental Technology SymposiumPTS Symposium WU-SY 50, 108, pp. 11-1–11-17.