Application and Investigation of Cellulose Acetate and TiO2-Enhanced Cellulose Acetate Forward Osmosis Membrane System for the Treatment of Tannery Wastewater

IJEP 46(8): 707-722 : Vol. 46 Issue 8 (August 2026)

Full Text

Pravin R. Gulave and Sadanand Guhe*

MGM University, Jawaharlal Nehru Engineering College, Department of Chemical Engineering, Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar – 431 003, Maharastra, India

Abstract

The performance of reverse osmosis (RO) systems is significantly hindered by conventional and/or membrane filtration pretreatment systems when used to treat and reuse tannery effluents. Forward osmosis has demonstrated effectiveness as a pretreatment process for reverse osmosis in the context of tannery wastewater. The characteristics of the pure cellulose acetate (CA) and titanium dioxide (TiO2)-functionalized CA membrane are examined through FTIR, SEM-EDX, water contact angle measurements, AFM and tensile strength analysis. This study examines the effectiveness of the CA and TiO2/CA forward osmosis process in concentrating tannery effluents, using 24 g/L and 38 g/L NaCl solutions as draw solutions. The results showed that a 38 g/L NaCl solution produced a higher flow rate and a smaller decrease in flow compared to a 24 g/L NaCl solution during the forward osmosis process. The TiO2/CA FO membrane demonstrated greater solute rejection in experiments using a 38 g/L NaCl solution as the draw solution, in contrast to those that employed a 24 g/L NaCl solution. Nonetheless, the rates of rejection for potassium and ammonium were minimal. The analysis of contact angle, Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy and scanning electron microscopy on both the pristine membrane and the TiO2-functionalized CA membrane, following chemical cleaning, revealed alterations in membrane structure and the presence of foulants on the membrane surface, suggesting that the chemical cleaning process was inadequate. The results demonstrate that the amount of draw solution (DS) and the cleaning method utilized are essential for the efficient concentration of treated tannery wastewater through the forward osmosis process.

Keywords

Tannery effluent, Forward osmosis, Cellulose acetate forward osmosis membrane, TiO2 functionalized cellulose acetate membrane, Draw solution concentration

References

  1. Paul, B., Patnaik, U., Jaganth, G. and Murari, K. 2022. Employment, technology and value chain: A case of Indian leather industry. Sci. Tech. Soc., 27(4): 563–586. DOI :10.1177/09717218211 010 618.
  2. Kaul, S.N., Nandy, T., Szpyrkowicz, L., Gautam, A. and Khanna, D. R. 2013. Wastewater management with special reference to tanneries (2nd edn). Discovery Publishing House, New Delhi.
  3. Pophali, G.R. and Dhodapkar, R.S. 2011. An overview of sustainability of common effluent treatment plant for clusters of tanneries. Env. Develop. Sustain., 13(3): 493–506. DOI: 10.1007/s10668-010-9272-6.
  4. Ramteke, P.W., Awasthi, S., Srinath, T. and Joseph, B. 2010. Efficiency assessment of common effluent treatment plant (CETP) treating tannery effluents. Env. Monit. Assess., 169(1–4): 125–131. DOI: 10.1007/s10661-009-1156-6.
  5. Sahasranaman, A. and Emmanuel, K.V. 2001. Common effluent treatment plant Kolkata Leather Complex, Kolkata, India. US/RAS/92/120-MODEL CETPs. Regional programme for pollution control in the tanning industry in southeast Asia. United Nations Industrial Development Organization.
  6. Zhao, J., Wu, Q., Tang, Y., Zhou, J. and Guo, H. 2022. Tannery wastewater treatment: Conventional and promising processes, an updated 20-year review. J. Leather Sci. Eng., 4(1): 10. DOI: 10.1186 /s42825-022-00082-7.
  7. Bhardwaj, A., Kumar, S. and Singh, D. 2023. Tannery effluent treatment and its environmental impact: A review of current practices and emerging technologies. Water Quality Res. J., 58(2): 128–152. DOI: 10.2166/wqrj.2023.002.
  8. Ranganathan, K. and Kabadgi, S.D. 2011. Studies on feasibility of reverse osmosis (membrane) technology for treatment of tannery wastewater. J. Env. Prot., 2(1): 37–46. DOI: 10.4236/jep. 2011.21004.
  9. Jang, A., Jung, J.T., Kang, H., Kim, H. S. and Kim, J.O. 2017. Reuse of effluent discharged from tannery wastewater treatment plants by powdered activated carbon and ultrafiltration combined reverse osmosis system. J. Water Reuse Desalination. 7(1): 97–102. DOI: 10.2166/wrd.2016. 001.
  10. Suthanthararajan, R., Ravindranath, E., Chits, K., Umamaheswari, B., Ramesh, T. and Rajamam, S. 2004. Membrane application for recovery and reuse of water from treated tannery wastewater. Desalination. 164(2): 151–156. DOI: 10.1016/S00 11-9164(04)00174-2.
  11. Buljan, J., Emmanuel, K. V., Bosnic, M. and Král’, I. 2017. Analysis of flow and energy aspects of zero liquid discharge (ZLD) technology in treatment of tannery effluents in Tamil Nadu, India. United Nations Industrial Development Organization.
  12. Pramanik, B.K., Roddick, F.A. and Fan, L. 2014. Effect of biological activated carbon pre-treatment to control organic fouling in the microfiltration of biologically treated secondary effluent. Water Res., 63: 147–157. DOI: 10.1016/j.watres.2014.06. 014.
  13. Sweity, A., Oren, Y., Ronen, Z. and Herzberg, M. 2013. The influence of antiscalants on biofouling of RO membranes in seawater desalination. Water Res., 47(10): 3389–3398. DOI: 10.1016/j.watres. 2013.03.042.
  14. Al-Zuhairi, A., Merdaw, A.A., Al-Aibi, S., Hamdan, M., Nicoll, P., Monjezi, A.A., Al-ASwad, S., Mahood, H.B., Aryafar, M. and Sharif, A.O. 2015. Forward osmosis desalination from laboratory to market. Water Supply. 15(4): 834–844. DOI: 10.2166/ws.2015.038.
  15. Korenak, J., Hélix-Nielsen, C., Bukšek, H. and Petriniæ, I. 2019. Efficiency and economic feasibility of forward osmosis in textile wastewater treatment. J. Clean. Prod., 210: 1483–1495. DOI: 10.1 016/j.jclepro.2018.11.130.
  16. Thiruvenkatachari, R., Francis, M., Cunnington, M. and Su, S. 2016. Application of integrated forward and reverse osmosis for coal mine wastewater desalination. Separation Purification Tech., 163: 181–188. DOI: 10.1016/j.seppur.2016.02.034.
  17. Zaviska, F., Chun, Y., Heran, M. and Zou, L. 2015. Using FO as pre-treatment of RO for high scaling potential brackish water: Energy and performance optimisation. J. Membrane Sci., 492: 430–438. DOI: 10.1016/j.memsci.2015.06.004.
  18. Pal, P., Chakrabortty, S., Nayak, J. and Senapati, S. 2017. A flux-enhancing forward osmosis–nano filtration integrated treatment system for the tannery wastewater reclamation. Env. Sci. Poll. Res., 24(18): 15768–15780. DOI: 10.1007/s11356-01 7-9206-z.
  19. APHA 5220 D. 1992. Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater (18th edn). 5220-D: Chemical oxygen demand (COD). American Public Health Association.
  20. APHA 4110. 1992. Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater (18th edn). 4110: Determination of anions by ion chromatography. American Public Health Association.
  21. APHA 3120 B. 1992. Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater (18th edn). 3120-B: Inductively coupled plasma (ICP) method. American Public Health Association.
  22. APHA 4500 NO3-. 1992. Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater (18th edn). 4500-NO3-: Nitrogen (nitrate). American Public Health Association.
  23. APHA 4500 P. 1992. Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater (18th edn). 4500-P: Phosphorus. American Public Health Association.
  24. Camilleri-Rumbau, M.S., Soler-Cabezas, J.L., Chris-tensen, K.V., Norddahl, B., Mendoza-Roca, J.A. and Vincent-Vela, M.C. 2019. Application of aquaporin-based forward osmosis membranes for processing of digestate liquid fractions. Chem. Eng. J., 371: 583–592. DOI: 10.1016/j.cej. 2019.02.029.
  25. Han, G., Liang, C.Z., Chung, T.S., Weber, M., Staudt, C. and Maletzko, C. 2016. Combination of forward osmosis (FO) process with coagulation/flocculation (CF) for potential treatment of textile wastewater. Water Res., 91: 361–370. DOI: 10.1016/j.watres.2016.01.031.
  26. Nguyen, T.A. and Yoshikawa, S. 2019. Modelling and economic optimization of the membrane module for ultrafiltration of protein solution using a genetic algorithm. Processes. 8(1): 4. DOI: 10.3390/pr8010004.
  27. Morrow, C. P. and Childress, A. E. 2019. Evidence, determination and implications of membrane independent limiting flux in forward osmosis systems. Env. Sci. Tech., 53(8): 4380–4388. DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.8b05925.
  28. Conidi, C., Fucà, L., Drioli, E. and Cassano, A. 2019. A membrane-based process for the recovery of glycyrrhizin and phenolic compounds from licorice wastewaters. Molecules. 24(12): 2279. DOI: 10.3 390/molecules24122279.
  29. Lay, W. C. L., Zhang, J., Tang, C., Wang, R., Liu, Y. and Fane, A.G. 2012. Factors affecting flux performance of forward osmosis systems. J. Membrane Sci., 394–395: 151–168. DOI: 10.1016/ j.memsci.2011.12.035.
  30. Gao, Y., Fang, Z., Liang, P. and Huang, X. 2018. Direct concentration of municipal sewage by forward osmosis and membrane fouling behaviour. Bioresour. Tech., 247: 730–735. DOI: 10.10 16/j.biortech.2017.09.145.
  31. Sagiv, A., Zhu, A., Christofides, P. D., Cohen, Y. and Semiat, R. 2014. Analysis of forward osmosis desalination via two-dimensional FEM model. J. Membrane Sci., 464: 161–172. DOI: 10.1016/j.memsci.2014.04.001.
  32. Gruber, M. F., Johnson, C. J., Tang, C., Jensen, M. H., Yde, L. and Hélix-Nielsen, C. 2012. Validation and analysis of forward osmosis CFD model in complex 3D geometries. Membranes. 2(4): 764–782. DOI: 10.3390/membranes2040764.
  33. Ortega-Bravo, J.C., Ruiz-Filippi, G., Donoso-Bravo, A., Reyes-Caniupán, I.E. and Jeison, D. 2016. Forward osmosis: Evaluation thin-film-composite membrane for municipal sewage concentration. Chem. Eng. J., 306: 531–537. DOI :10.1016/j.cej.2016. 07.085.
  34. Duong, P. H. H. and Chung, T.S. 2014. Application of thin film composite membranes with forward osmosis technology for the separation of emulsified oil–water. J. Membrane Sci., 452: 117–126. DOI: 10.1016/j.memsci.2013.10.030.
  35. Pham, M. T., Nishihama, S. and Yoshizuka, K. 2021. Removal of chromium from water environment by forward osmosis system. MATEC Web Conf., 333: 04007. DOI: 10.1051/matec conf/202133304007.
  36. Hancock, N.T., Phillip, W.A., Elimelech, M. and Cath, T.Y. 2011. Bidirectional permeation of electrolytes in osmotically driven membrane processes. Env. Sci. Tech., 45(24): 10642–10651. DOI: 10.1021/es202608y.
  37. She, Q., Jin, X., Li, Q. and Tang, C.Y. 2012. Relating reverse and forward solute diffusion to membrane fouling in osmotically driven membrane processes. Water Res., 46(7): 2478–2486. DOI: 10.1 016/j.watres.2012.02.024.
  38. Damirchi, M. and Koyuncu, I. 2021. Nutrient recovery from concentrated municipal wastewater by forward osmosis membrane and MgCl2based draw solution. Desalination Water Treatment. 211: 448–455. DOI: 10.5004/dwt.2021.26788.
  39. Luo, W., Xie, M., Song, X., Guo, W., Ngo, H.H., Zhou, J.L. and Nghiem, L.D. 2018. Biomimetic aquaporin membranes for osmotic membrane bioreactors: Membrane performance and contaminant removal. Bioresour. Tech., 249: 62–68. DOI: 10.1016/j.biortech.2017.09.170.
  40. Hickenbottom, K. L., Hancock, N. T., Hutchings, N. R., Appleton, E. W., Beaudry, E.G., Xu, P. and Cath, T.Y. 2013. Forward osmosis treatment of drilling mud and fracturing wastewater from oil and gas operations. Desalination. 312: 60–66. DOI: 10.1 016/j.desal.2012.05.037.
  41. Coday, B. D., Almaraz, N. and Cath, T. Y. 2015. Forward osmosis desalination of oil and gas wastewater: Impacts of membrane selection and operating conditions on process performance. J. Membrane Sci., 488: 40–55. DOI: 10.1016/j.memsci. 2015.03.059.
  42. Roy, D., Rahni, M., Pierre, P. and Yargeau, V. 2016. Forward osmosis for the concentration and reuse of process saline wastewater. Chem. Eng. J., 287: 277–284. DOI: 10.1016/j.cej.2015. 11.012.
  43. Tasci, R.O., Kaya, M.A. and Celebi, M. 2022. Hydrophilicity and flux properties improvement of high performance polysulphone membranes via sulphonation and blending with poly(lactic acid). High Performance Polymers. 34(10): 1115–1130. DOI: 10.1 177/09540083221110031.
  44. Khraisheh, M., Gulied, M. and AlMomani, F. 2020. Effect of membrane fouling on fertilizer-drawn forward osmosis desalination performance. Membranes. 10(9): 243. DOI: 10.3390/membranes 1009 0243.
  45. Li, Z., Linares, R.V., Bucs, S., Fortunato, L., Hélix-Nielsen, C., Vrouwenvelder, J. S., Ghaffour, N., Leiknes, T. and Amy, G. 2017. Aquaporin based biomimetic membrane in forward osmosis: Chemical cleaning resistance and practical operation. Desalination. 420: 208–215. DOI: 10.1016/j.desal. 2017.07.015.
  46. Sonawane, A.V. and Murthy, Z.V.P. 2022. Synthesis and characterization of ZIF-8-based PVDF mixed matrix membranes and application to treat pulp and paper industry wastewater using a membrane bioreactor. Env. Sci.: Water Res. Tech., 8: 881–896. DOI: 10.1039/d2ew00011c.
  47. Arefi-Oskoui, S., Khataee, A., Safarpour, M. and Vatanpour, V. 2020. Modification of polyether-sulphone ultrafiltration membrane using ultrasonic-assisted functionalized MoS2 for treatment of oil refinery wastewater. Seperation Purif. Tech., 238. DOI: 10.1016/j.seppur.2019.116495.
  48. Liang, X., Wang, P., Wang, J., Zhang, Y., Wu, W., Liu, J. and Van der Bruggen, B. 2019. Zwitterionic functionalized MoS2 nanosheets for a novel composite membrane with effective salt/dye separation performance. J. Membrane Sci., 573: 270–279. DOI: 10.1016/j.memsci. 2018.12.015.