Submitted Successfully!
To reward your contribution, here is a gift for you: A free trial for our video production service.
Thank you for your contribution! You can also upload a video entry or images related to this topic.
Version Summary Created by Modification Content Size Created at Operation
1
Olga Senko
 -- 3970 2023-05-19 12:14:10 |
2 format corrected.
Beatrix Zheng
 Meta information modification 3970 2023-05-22 03:03:51 | |
3 format corrected.
Beatrix Zheng
 -123 word(s) 3847 2023-05-22 08:50:20 |

Video Upload Options

We provide professional Video Production Services to translate complex research into visually appealing presentations. Would you like to try it?
No, upload directly Yes

Confirm

Are you sure to Delete?
Yes No
Cite
If you have any further questions, please contact Encyclopedia Editorial Office.
Maslova, O.; Senko, O.; Gladchenko, M.A.; Gaydamaka, S.N.; Efremenko, E. Catalysts and Biocatalysts Combinations for Hydrocarbon Pollutants Elimination. Encyclopedia. Available online: https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/44559 (accessed on 23 January 2025).
Maslova O, Senko O, Gladchenko MA, Gaydamaka SN, Efremenko E. Catalysts and Biocatalysts Combinations for Hydrocarbon Pollutants Elimination. Encyclopedia. Available at: https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/44559. Accessed January 23, 2025.
Maslova, Olga, Olga Senko, Marina A. Gladchenko, Sergey N. Gaydamaka, Elena Efremenko. "Catalysts and Biocatalysts Combinations for Hydrocarbon Pollutants Elimination" Encyclopedia, https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/44559 (accessed January 23, 2025).
Maslova, O., Senko, O., Gladchenko, M.A., Gaydamaka, S.N., & Efremenko, E. (2023, May 19). Catalysts and Biocatalysts Combinations for Hydrocarbon Pollutants Elimination. In Encyclopedia. https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/44559
Maslova, Olga, et al. "Catalysts and Biocatalysts Combinations for Hydrocarbon Pollutants Elimination." Encyclopedia. Web. 19 May, 2023.
Catalysts and Biocatalysts Combinations for Hydrocarbon Pollutants Elimination
Edit
This entry is adapted from the peer-reviewed paper 10.3390/app13095815

Due to the presence of environmental problems, it is urgent to improve the processes aimed at the processing and purification of hydrocarbon-containing wastes and wastewaters. 

nanocatalysts nanocomposites hydrocarbon pollutants

1. Introduction

In the 21st century, industries related to the extraction, transportation, storage, processing and use of hydrocarbon raw materials continue to actively develop. Various wastewaters of oil-producing, oil-refining, chemical, transporting and other fields of industry form multi-tonnage effluents containing residual concentrations of hydrocarbons [1][2][3][4]. The volume of oilfield-produced water (OPW) alone is on average at least 250 million barrels per day worldwide [2][5][6]. Crude oil emulsions and hydrocarbon-contaminated wastewaters and soils are considered sources of potential threat to the environment and living objects [7].
Polyaromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes (BTEX) usually predominate among dissolved organic compounds in hydrocarbon-containing wastes [8].
Hydrocarbon-containing wastewaters may contain various toxic organic compounds: aromatic substances, MTBE (methyl tert-butyl ethers), naphthenic acids, methanol, ketones, ethers, brominated organic compounds, estrogens, PCBs (polychlorinated biphenyls), phthalates, linear alkyl benzene sulfonates, furans and others [1][4][9][10]. However, BTEX are rarely considered due to their high volatility and rapid decomposition in water as a source of serious ecotoxicological effects. It is believed that phenols and PAHs (naphthalene, acenaphthylene, acenaphthene, fluorene, phenanthrene, anthracene, fluoranthene, pyrene, chrysene and others) pose the greatest danger to the environment and human health. Alkylphenols, especially with long (C7–C9–carbon) chain, and naphthenic acids can have a significant negative effect on the endocrine system, causing estrogenic effects in vertebrates [6][11].

2. Combined Applications of NCs and BCs for Elimination of Hydrocarbon Pollutants

It is known today that chemical-only or biocatalytic-only approaches are rarely used for deep wastewater treatment containing hydrocarbon pollutants. The mechanisms of action of NCs and BCs for individual application are described in detail in many articles and mainly depend on the chemical composition of hydrocarbon pollutants and catalysts, as well as the conditions for the treatment of contaminants [4][9][12][13][14][15][16]. The possibility of their combination at the secondary and tertiary stages of wastewater treatment is most often considered [10][17]. The development and implementation of NCs and NComs (Table 1) in combination with highly efficient BCs (Table 2) is the basis for successfully solving urgent problems related to the processes of water and soil purification from hydrocarbon pollutants. Two approaches to the integration of chemical and biocatalytic stages of wastewater treatment are known: (a) sequential physical–chemical and biocatalytic treatment conducted in different combinations and (b) the simultaneous carrying out of physical–chemical treatments and biodegradation in one reactor.
Table 1. Advanced oxidation processes with NCs and NComs for degradation of hydrocarbon pollutants *.
NCs/NComs; Size (nm)
[Reference]		 Pollutants Reaction Conditions Removal
Efficiency (%)
Heterogeneous photocatalysis
TiO2
(30 nm) [18]		 Phenol (300 ± 7 mg/L), soap oil and grease (SOG) (4000 ± 23 mg/L) in oil refinery wastewater 8 g/L of catalyst, aeration flow rate of 1.225 L/min, 90 min 76% of phenol and 88% of SOG
TiO2
(44.3–48.0 nm) [19]		 Anthraquinone
(0.5 mg/L)		 200 mg/L of catalyst, solar irradiation 100 mW/cm2, 240 min 57%
Haematite (α-Fe2O3) [20] Petroleum refinery wastewater
COD 1257 mg/L		 pH 7.5, 1.494 g/L of catalyst, H2O2/COD ratio of 1 mg/mg, UV-A lamp solar irradiation,
90 min		 90.85% of COD
ZnO or NiO [13] Anthracene
(101.8 mg/L)		 pH 7.2, 55.6 mg/L of catalyst, emulsion solution—230 min, anthracene aqueous ethanol solution—280 min 90% with ZnO and 87% with NiO for anthracene emulsion solution; 81% with ZnO and 86% with NiO for anthracene aqueous ethanol solution
ZnO nanorods
2.11 ± 0.32 μm length and 96.26 ± 11.13 nm diameter [21]		 Phenol
(10 mg/L)		 pH 5,
visible light 1000 W/m2, 5 h		 84.3%
ZnO/SiO2 with Palash leaves extract
(3–35 nm) [22]		 Acenaphthylene (176 mg/L), COD (497 mg/L) in petrochemical wastewater 1 g/L of catalyst, 30 °C,
visible light, 4 h		 79% of Acenaphthylene, 70% of COD
HS-CuS-HNCs
Hierarchically structured CuS hollow nanocatalyst [12]		 Petroleum refinery wastewater
(COD 380 mg/L)		 pH 7.6, 1 g/L
of catalyst, 180 min, 10 cycles		 about 66% of COD
TiO2@ZnHCF
Titanium dioxide based zinc hexacyanoferrate framework nanocomposite (100 nm) [23]		 Tricyclic PAHs:
acenaphthene, phenanthrene and fluorine
(2 mg/L)		 Neutral pH, 15 mg/L of catalyst, sunlight, 6 h 93–96% from water, 82–86% from soil, 81.63–85.43% from river sediment
Fe3O4/Cu2O-Ag nanocomposite (5 nm) [24] PAHs: naphthalene (5 mg/L), benzo(a)pyrene (5 mg/L), anthracene (5 mg/L) 0.5 g/L of catalyst, visible light, 60–180 min 80–90%
MIL-101(Cr)/Fe3O4-SiO2
(35% of Fe3O4-SiO2)
Superhydrophobic composite
(400/80–120 nm) [14]		 Synthetic and real oilfield-produced water (TPH 170 mg/L, COD 550 mg/L) pH 4, 0.5 g/L of catalyst, visible and UV light, 150 min 97.7% and 99.2% of TPH, 95.17% and 96.6% of COD from real and synthetic OPW, respectively
Fenton-like oxidation process
Nanoscale zero-valent iron (nZVI), commercial
(50 nm) [25]		 Water from oil and gas exploration site (15 different PAHs present in real water samples; Naphthalene (201.46 μg/L) and benzo(g,h,i) perylene
(23.15 μg/L)		 pH 2.94, 4.35 g/L of nZVI,
1.60 g/L of H2O2, 199.90 min		 89.5% and 75.3% of PAHs and COD, respectively
MgAl-LDH@Fe3O4 [26] Concentrated liquor of gas field wastewater (refractory organic pollutants) pH 5, heterogeneous electro-Fenton system, 4 h 88.18% for COD
Cl/S-codoped carbon nitride nanotube clusters (Cl/S-TCN) [27] Oilfield-produced water pH range 3–9, metal-free photo-Fenton, 10 mM H2O2 82.6% for COD
Ozonation
CuO/Activated carbon
(250~350 nm) [28]		 Heavy oil refinery wastewater (oil 78 mg/L, COD 2950 mg/L) pH 7.3, 5.0 g of catalyst,
90 mg/L of O3, 75 min		 94.2% of COD
89.7% of oil
Sulfate radical-based oxidation
OMS-2
Manganese oxide octahedral molecular sieve nanorods [29]		 PAH: phenanthrene (1.0 mg/L) in water and sewage pH range 4–11, 0.1 g/L of catalyst,
peroxomonosulfates
6 mmol/L, room temperature, 360 min, 3 cycles		 >99%, 68%, 82% and 79% from model wasterwater, tap water, Yellow river and Qinghai lake, respectively
Hybrid chemical processes with nanocatalysts
HS-CuS-HNCs
Hierarchically
structured CuS hollow nanocatalyst [12]		 Petroleum refinery wastewater
(COD 380 mg/L)		 Heterogeneous
photocatalysis/H2O2
pH 7.6, 1000 mg/L of catalyst, 3000 mg/L of H2O2, room temperature, solar-light, 2 h		 98% of COD
M.MIL-100(Fe)@ZnO [30] Phenol (5 mg/L),
Biphenol A (5 mg/L),
Atrazine (5 mg/L)		 Heterogeneous
photocatalysis/H2O2
pH 2, 0.2 g/L of catalyst, 10 mM H2O2, room temperature, 2 h		 95% of Phenol,
95% of Biphenol A, 85% of
Atrazine
CuO/ZrO2
nanocomposite
40.32 nm [31]		 Marine diesel
(100 mg/L)		 Heterogeneous
photocatalysis/H2O2
0.5 g/L of catalyst, 400 °C, 0.3 g/L of H2O2, visible light, 6 h		 96.96%
Cu-based perovskite oxides (La2CuO4) [32] Petroleum refining wastewater
(COD 3800 mg/L
TOC 1259 mg/L)		 Wet air oxidation
processes/H2O2 pH 7.5–8.0,
0.75 g/L of catalyst, 7 mL/L of
30% H2O2, 100 ℃, 0.5 h		 89.58% of COD, 87.38% of TOC
* COD—chemical oxygen demand; MIL—Materials of Institute Lavoisier; MIL-101(Cr)—metal–organic frameworks (MOFs) based on chromium (III) and polymeric terephthalate; M.MIL-100(Fe)—mesoporous metal–organic framework based on iron (III) carboxylate; OPW—oilfield-produced water; PAHs—Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons; PRW—petroleum refinery wastewater; SOG—soap oil and grease; TiO2@ZnHCF—Titanium dioxide based zinc hexacyanoferrate framework; TOC—Total organic carbon.
Table 2. Biocatalytic treatments of various hydrocarbon pollutants.
Biocatalyst [Reference] Pollutants Conditions and Degradation Efficiency
Homogenous BCs
Achromobacter xylosoxidans [33] Pyrene 100 mg/L pH 7–9, 37–40 °C, 0–2.5% NaCl,
15 days, 50% of of pyrene
Halomonas shengliensis [34] Pyrene 50 ppm 25 °C, 10 g/L NaCl; 50% degradation
Penicillium sp. [35] Crude oil 1% (v/v) 14 days, 30 °C; 57% degradation
Chlorella vulgaris [36] Oilfield-produced water (7 mg total hydrocarbons/L) and crude oil (32 mg total hydrocarbons/L) 5 days, 20 °C; 36.8 ± 4.2 μmol photons/m2/s
28.5% degradation from
oilfield-produced water;
34.3% degradation from crude oil
Rhodocccus erythropolis or Pseudomonas stuzeri [37] PAHs
(332.2 mg/kg soil)		 Slurry Bioreactor, 28 °C, pH 8.2; 8 mg/L dissolved oxygen, 15 days, 70–80% degradation
Brevibacillus brevis [38] Naphthalene and pyrene
(100 mg/L)		 pH 5.0, 25 °C, 18 days, 80% of naphthalene
Proteus mirabilis [38] pH 5.0, 25 °C, 18 days, 94% of naphthalene
Rhodococcus quinshengi [38] pH 5.0, 37 °C, 18 days, biodegradation:
94% of naphthalene, 56% of pyrene
R. ruber Ac-1513 D and
R. erythropolis Ac-1514 D [39]		 Petroleum hydrocarbons 446.7–526.8 g/kg dry soil Aerobic-anaerobic bioremediation method with 108 cells/mL; nitrate salt is used as electron acceptor on area 25 × 30 m2 3 times with a 3-week interval; 20–30 °C; 63 days; Degradation of saturated, aromatic and resin-asphaltene was 72.6%, 66.5% and 57.2%, respectively.
R. ruber Ac-1513 D and
R. erythropolis Ac-1514 D [40]		 Oil products
482 g/kg dry soil (48%)		 Hydrolysis of the bituminous crust by calcium hydroxide (2%) 3 times with a 3–4-day interval; bioremediation with Rhodococcus strains (106 cells/mL) was conducted 3 times with a 7-day interval;
20–30 °C, pH 7.8; 33 days for 26.4–48.2% degradation of oil pollution
R. ruber Ac-1513 D and R. erythropolis Ac-1514 D [41] Oil products
98 g/kg dry soil (9.8%)		 Anaerobic bioremediation, 109 cells/mL
electron acceptor Ca(NO3)2; 1.25%, 28 °C,
pH 7.8; 10 days; potential degradation of the oil pollution 90% for 90 days
Extremophilic consortium: Ochrobactrum, Bacillus, Marinobacter, Pseudomonas, Martelella, Stenotrophomonas and Rhodococcus [42] Low-molecular-weight (LMW) petroleum hydrocarbons (200 ppm) such as anthracene, phenanthrene,
fluorene and naphthalene		 Soil, 8% salinity, pH 10, 60 °C,
8 days, 100% degradation efficiency
High-molecular-weight (HMW) hydrocarbons such as pyrene (100 ppm), benzo(e)pyrene (20 ppm), benzo(k)fluoranthene
(20 ppm) and
benzo(a)pyrene (20 ppm)		 Soil, 8% salinity, pH 10, 60 °C,
8 days, 93%, 60%, 55% and 51% degradation
Consortium: Campylobacter hominis, Bacillus cereus, Dyadobacter koreensis, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Micrococcus luteus [43] Bonny light crude oil 2% (v/v) crude oil, 30 °C,
21 days 73% degradation
Consortium of genus Pseudomonas, Methylobacillus, Nocardioides, Achromobacter, Methylophilaceae, Pseudoxanthomonas, Caulobacter [15] The final concentration of total PAHs from coal and petroleum was 97.63 mg/ kg dry weight soil 35 days, 25 °C, in soil;
75% PAHs
Halophilic bacterial consortium [44] PAHs 12 days, pH 7.4, 40 g/L NaCl concentration
low-molecular-weight (above 90% for phenanthrene and fluorene) and high-molecular-weight (69  ±  1.4 and 56  ±  1.8% at 50 and 100 mg/L of pyrene) polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs)
Benthic diatom-associated bacteria [45] 3 μg/L Benzo(a)pyrene and 265 μg/L fluoranthene 7 days, 88% of fluoranthene,
79% of Benzo(a)pyrene
Consortium: Aspergillus niger,
Aspergillus sydowii,
Fusarium lichenicola [46]		 101.7 mg/L PAHs
in oilfield wastewater		 21 days, 85.2% degradation
(with 100% naphthalene and chrysene)
Consortium of Chlorella sp. and Rhodococcus wratislaviensis with
preliminary adaptation [47]		 Mixture of 50 mg/L phenanthrene, 10 mg/L pyrene,
10 mg/L benzo[a]pyrene		 24 °C, 200 μmol photons/m2/s,
150 rpm, 21 days
100% degradation
Nannochloropsis oculata
or Isochrysis galbana with
preliminary adaptation [48]		 Oilfield-produced water
(270 mg oil/L)		 pH 7.2, 25 ± 1 °C,
light photoperiod—18:6 (2000 lux);
66.5–68% degradation
Immobilized BCs including self-immobilized systems (biofilms)
Bacterial consortium immobilized in magnetic floating biochar gel beads [49] Pyrene (20 mg/L), benzo(a)pyrene (10 mg/L),
indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene
(10 mg/L)		 Seawater, pH 8.1, 30 °C, 30‰ salinity, 16 days.
Biodegradation:
89.8%, 66.9% and 78.2% of
PYR, BAP and INP, respectively
Biofilm and pellets of consortium (key functional genera: Rhodobacter, Citreibacter, and Roseovarius) [50] Oilfield-produced water
(6.38 ± 2.31 mg oil/L)		 multistage bio-contact oxidation reactor, pH 7.5–8.1, 45–50 °C,
44.07% oil degradation
Microbial mats (cyanobacteria and bacteria) [51] Oilfield-produced water
(4.3 ± 1.0 mg of the C10 to C30 alkanes/g mats)		 28 days, 30 °C, 50 rpm, pH 8.5, 18 ppt salinity, with partially hydrolyzed polyacrylamide;
41–49% degradation
Active sludge [52] Synthetic produced water
(255 mg oil/L)		 Aeration tank, 3.5 L/min air, pH 6.0,
7 days; 51 g/L sodium chloride,
99.01 ± 0.28% degradation
This system contained dissolved air flotation (DAF), yeast bioreactor (yeast immobilized on policyurepan), upflow anaerobic sludge blanket reactor (UASB), and biological aerated filter [53] Oilfield wastewater
(145 mg oil/L)		 60 days,
99.6% oil degradation
Native halophilic bacterial consortium immobilized on walnut shell [54] Synthetic oilfield-produced water (191 mg/L oil) 48 days, moving bed biofilm reactor,
97.8% oil degradation
Methanogenic culture derived from a high-temperature oil reservoir production water [55] Paraffinic n-alkanes
(C22–C30)		 97% degradation and biogas accumulation, 736 days
Consortium immobilized in cryogel of poly (vinyl alcohol): AC1 (80% anaerobic sludge plus 10% Desulfovibrio vulgaris plus 10% Clostridium acetobutilycum) for the straight-run gasoline fraction (Nafta) and AC3 (70% anaerobic sludge plus
10% D. vulgaris plus
10% C. acetobutilycum plus
5% Rhodococcus ruber plus
5% Rhodococcus erythropolis) for the straight-run diesel oil raction, non-hydrotreated vacuum gas oil, gas condensate, and crude oil [56]		 Sulfur-containing extracts from pre-oxidized crude oil, non-purified vacuum gas oil, straight-run gasoline fraction (Naphtha), gas condensate and straight-run diesel fraction
(7–10 g/L COD)		 Biotransformation in methanogenic anaerobic reactor,
100% conversion of S-organic compounds to inorganic sulfide or biomass, biogas accumulation with 68–76% of CH4 for 20 days
Consortium immobilized in cryogel of poly (vinyl alcohol): AC6 (80% anaerobic sludge plus
10% Rhodococcus opacus plus
10% Desulfovibrio desulfuricans) [57]		 Sulfur-containing extracts from pre-oxidized crude oil and oil fractions with hydrolysates of chicken manure and Chlorella vulgaris biomass (6.4–16 g/L COD) Biotransformation in methanogenic anaerobic reactor, 100% conversion of S-organic compounds to inorganic sulfide or biomass, biogas accumulation with greater than
70% of CH4 for 6–42 days
Consortium immobilized in cryogel of poly(vinyl alcohol): AC6 (80% anaerobic sludge plus
10% R. opacus plus
10% D. desulfuricans) and
AC7 (90% adapted DEAMOX sludge plus 10% anaerobic sludge) [57]		 Sulfur-containing extracts from non-purified vacuum gas oil with hydrolysates of chicken manure and Chlorella vulgaris biomass
(6.4 g/L COD)		 The two-stage biotransformation in methanogenic anaerobic reactor (MAR) and denitrifying ammonium oxidation (DEAMOX) reactor;
100% conversion of S-organic compounds to inorganic sulfide or biomass, biogas accumulation with 70% of CH4 for 20 days
Combination of BCs with nanomaterials
S. aestuarii 357 [58] Naphthalene
(0.128 mg/L)		 Two stages: (1) the formation of the naphthalene@FeNP-NDI-DA complex with FeNP-NDI-DA nanoparticals; (2) addition of S. aestuarii 357; 100% biodegradation
Brevibacillus parabrev
1.13 × 108 cells/mL [59]		 Oily wastewater: Tetradecane 3% Magnetic NPs of Fe3O4 (10 nm) 76% tetradecane was degraded by cells for 15 days
Halamonas sp., Vibrio gazogenes or Marinobacter hydrocarbonoclasticus [60] Crude oil (375 mg/L) Polyvinylpyrrolidone (PVP)-coated iron oxide NPs (11.2 nm)
100% oil degradation for 24–48 h
M. hydrocarbonoclasticus [61] Crude oil (0.5% w/v) Facile chemical modification of mesoporous
silica NPs (mSNPs) (10 nm)
100% oil degradation for 45 days
Bacillus cereus
1.55 × 105 cells/mL [16]		 PAHs: Anthracene, phenanthrene Graphene oxide quantum dots (GOQDs)
52.7% degradation of PAHs for 3.5 days
(1.7% degradation in control sample)
Consortium in
membrane bioreactor [62]		 Petroleum refinery wastewater
(52.2 mg/L COD)		 Membrane bioreactor (MBR)-H2O2/UV Hybrid pretreatment before nanofiltration
80% of COD degradation for 1 h
To choose a hybrid approach to the removal of pollutants, one of the key parameters is the initial chemical content of the cleaning object and the initial concentration of toxic components. At high concentrations of phenol in effluents, it is recommended to carry out preliminary chemical treatment in combination with further biocatalytic stages [63].
Petroleum refinery wastewater is a complex mixture of hydrocarbons, sulfides, ammonia, oils, suspended and dissolved solids and heavy metals. Depending on the type of wastewater (desalinated, acidic, spent alkaline and oily wastewaters), various sequential combined physical–chemical-biocatalytic purification methods are proposed at the secondary treatment stage (ozonation with treatment in a biofilm reactor with a movable layer or photocatalysis with treatment in a biofilm reactor with a compacted layer, etc.) [17][64].
For the purification of oilfield-produced water containing a mixture of suspended substances (including PAHs: pyrene, phenanthrene, anthracene and naphthalene) and dissolved organic (a mixture of phenol, benzene, xylenes, toluene and ethylbenzene) and non-organic (cations of barium, calcium, magnesium, sodium, potassium and heavy metals and anions such as chloride) compounds, biocatalytic treatment is usually carried out at the secondary stage of purification. Aerobic biocatalytic treatment is followed by a tertiary deep purification stage, which includes one or more stages: electrodialysis, macroporous polymer extraction (MPPE), microporous membrane treatment, electrolysis, ion exchange and AOPs [10]. In general, with the subsequent combination of several approaches to purification, the biocatalytic stages are now successfully combined with membrane technology, advanced oxidation processes (AOPs), electrochemical methods and other modern purification technologies. Among the advantages of hybrid sequential or one-time implemented processes, their environmental friendliness and the possibility of saving resources are indicated. Thus, for the complete mineralization of organic compounds, photocatalysis usually requires too much energetic costs and is often accompanied by the formation of dangerous by-products. The combination of photocatalysis and biodegradation joins the advantages of both technologies; is characterized by simple functioning, low energy consumption and high cleaning efficiency; and represents an actual direction of the current trend of research [65][66].
Membrane bioreactors are increasingly being offered as the technological design of hybrid processes associated with the deep purification of real wastewater [62][67]. Among the main competitive advantages of membrane technologies, it is possible to note the production of highly purified wastewater and the possible separation of growing biomass in a membrane bioreactor. In membrane bioreactors, biological purification is successfully combined with the microfiltration/ultrafiltration/nanofiltration/direct osmosis of effluents. At the tertiary stage of purification, membrane bioreactors are combined with membrane distillation and electrodialysis [68]. To improve the operation of membrane bioreactors, the use of various nanomaterials is being actively mastered [69]. Membrane systems based on nanomaterials provide an increase in the available flow rate per square unit of the membrane and contribute to the even more efficient removal of target contaminants with a longer period of membrane operation [68]. It is obvious that the development of membrane technologies in combination with nanomaterials with NCs and BCs is a fundamental trend in the current development of technologies for the elimination of hydrocarbon pollutants.
The successful application of a membrane bioreactor was demonstrated during the purification of petroleum refinery wastewater using a hybrid approach combining the intimate coupling of photocatalysis and biodegradation (ICPB) [67]. ICPB assumes the simultaneous carrying out of physical–chemical treatment and biodegradation in one reactor and ensures the achievement of good results in the decomposition of PAHs [65].
When combining different processes in one reactor, biodegradable intermediate products obtained as a result of the physical–chemical treatment of waste are immediately biodegradable. Thus, during the photocatalytic destruction of toluene, its partial transformation to biodegradable intermediates was ensured. Then, the appeared product was immediately mineralized by microorganisms [70].
Today, hybrid processes such as ICPB are known for the degradation of hydrocarbon pollutants (Table 3) [67][70][71][72][73][74][75][76][77][78] and some persistent and toxic organic pollutants [65]. At the same time, it can be argued that research in this direction is currently almost at the initial stage of development but will actively advance in the near future.
Table 3. Variants of the intimate coupling of photocatalysis and biodegradation (ICPB) for hydrocarbon pollutants treatment *.
Pollutants
[Reference]		 NCs/NCs; Size (nm)
Physical or/and Chemical Treatment		 BC/Co-Substrate Removal Efficiency (%)
Naphthalene,
Phenanthrene,
Anthracene,
Fluoranthene,
Pyrene (PAHs) in soil (200 mg/kg) [71]		 Ag3PO4@Fe3O4
UV-visible light
photocatalyst
(100–300 nm)		 Adapted consortium (sewage sludge) in microcapsules of Ca-alginate gel and carboxymethyl cellulose 94% of PAHs mixture,
~100% of naphthalene, phenanthrene, anthracene,
~93% of fluoranthene, pyrene
for 30 days
Phenanthrene in water (PAH) [72] Composite Mn3O4/MnO2-Ag3PO4
photocatalyst under visible light illumination		 Biofilms with Shewanella, Sedimentibacter, Comamonas, Acinetobacter and Pseudomonascells 96.2% degradation for 20 min,
100% non-toxic intermediates
for 10 h
Phenanthrene
in water [73]		 Cu/N-codoped TiO2 photocatalyst under UV or visible light illumination PAH-degrading bacterial consortium with Pseudomonadaceae cells UV (88.63% ± 0.71%) or visible light (62.87% ± 2.19%) from 10 mg/L for 6 h at room temperature;
9.31% ± 0.82% when only cells as BCs
are used
Pyrene (PAH) [74] Cu/N-codoped TiO2 photocatalyst under visible or UV light illumination PAH-degrading bacterial consortium 63.89% ± 1.03%
(Visual light biol. treatment)
>61.27% ± 1.08% (UV biol. treatment)
>59.58% ± 1.15% (UV)
>57.41% ± 1.13% (Visual light)
>6.65% ± 0.72% (biol. treatment)
>1.70% ± 0.34% (control)
Phenol, 4-chlorophenol (4-CP), and 4-fluorophenol (4-FP) [75] N-doped TiO2 (30 nm) coated POHFs/combined UV and visible light Microbial consortium: Scenedesmus obliquus
(S. obliquus) biofilm with Rhodococcus and
Pseudomonas cells		 The removals of DOC and COD of the phenolic compounds in mixture
(1.06 mM phenol, 0.39 mM of 4-CP and 0.45 mM of 4-FP) for 11 h are
~98% and ~91%, respectively
Toluene [70] N-doped TiO2/PP Microbial
consortium		 99%, with the elimination capacity of 550 g/m3/h
1,2,4 trichlorobenzene [76] Sugarcane cellulose-TiO2 Microbial
consortium		 68.01%, which is 14.81% higher than that of biodegradation or photocatalysis alone, and the mineralization rate is 50.30%, which is 11.50% higher than that of photocatalysis alone
Phenol (100 mg/L) [77] CdS@SiO2@TRP nanocomposite photocatalyst under intermittent visible light irradiation Adapted
Pseudomonas putida cells		 Simultaneous removal
97.24% of phenol for 10 h
Petroleum refinery wastewater [67] Anatase nanocrystalline particles TiO2 (14 nm), catalyst concentration Microbial consortium in Membrane Bioreactor, pH 10 100 mg/L of TiO2;
32% and 67% of TOC and
TN for 90 min
Benzene (100 mg/L), toluene(100 mg/L), and xylene (100 mg/L) [78] Zinc sulfide (ZnS) nanoparticles (20–90 nm), UV-A light, 28 °C, pH 4 Aspergillus niger 100% for 1 h
* TOC—total organic carbon; TN—total nitrogen; TRP—thermal-responsive polymer, which was composed of N-isopropyl acrylamide, acrylamide and the cross-linker N,N′-methylenebisacrylamide; PP—polypropylene; POHFs—photocatalytic optical hollow fibers; DOC—dissolved organic carbon.
Among the known ICPB processes involving NCs, processes with TiO2 and its derivatives predominate, which provide the destruction of toluene [70], phenanthrene [73], pyrene [74], phenol, 4-chlorophenol (4-CP) and 4-fluorophenol (4-FP) [75], 1,2,4-trichlorobenzene [76] and petroleum refinery wastewater [67].
For those processes, where a comparative assessment of the effectiveness of joint and separate applications of biocatalysis and photocatalysis was carried out, the ICPB priority was shown [74][76]. The processes of hybrid biological and photocatalytic degradation of PAHs in soil with Ag3PO4@Fe3O4 and in water with Mn3O4/MnO2- Ag3PO4 have been studied with the combined use of microbial BCs and NCs with photocatalytic activity in visible light [71][72]. The test of biocompatibility showed that Ag3PO4@Fe3O4 had practically no negative effect on the activity of soil microorganisms. These results open up new prospects for the joint use of photochemistry and biocatalytic technologies to solve urgent problems of environmental biotechnology, particularly for the removal of hydrocarbon pollutants.
For hybrid systems involving the combined use of chemical and biological catalysis, it is important to not only ensure the biocompatibility of components but also protect the activity of BCs. A hybrid photo-controlled reversible photocatalytic ICPB system has been developed with a mechanism of protecting microorganisms from the attack of reactive oxidative species formed during photocatalysis [77]. The surface of the CdS-photocatalyst was coated with SiO2, and then a thermosensitive polymer (TRP) was applied to cover the surface of CDs@SiO2. This polymer was composed of N-isopropyl acrylamide, acrylamide, and the cross-linker (N,N′-methylenebisacrylamide). The resulting CdS@SiO2@TRP was attached to the surface of graphene (photothermal converter) to form a photo-controlled reversible photocatalytic system. Without light irradiation, soluble pollutants were biodegraded or absorbed by the CdS@SiO2@TRP. Under light irradiation, reactive oxidative species, photogenerated due to the activation of the protective polymer cover, were formed inside CDs@SiO2@TRP and photocatalytically decomposed the pollutants without contact between reactive oxidative species and microorganisms.
It should be noted that in hybrid systems, in addition to chemical and biocatalytic components, there is most often an important component such as a carrier, whose role is not limited to protecting BCs from the influence of negative environmental factors, particularly free radicals [79]. Among carriers, priority is given to biocompatible materials (cellulose, ceramics and loofah) [66][80]. Microcapsules based on Ca-alginate gel and carboxymethyl cellulose successfully protected BCs from direct contact with the photocatalyst and free radicals, increasing the life of BCs during the photocatalytic decomposition of PAHs [71]. Cellulose used as a carrier provided conditions for the growth of cells of the genus Ruminiclostridium used as BCs and played an additional role of co-substrate [76]. In this case, the cellulose carrier was not only biocompatible but also biodegradable. The presence of a co-substrate or its formation in the workflow can contribute to improving the efficiency of the implementation of hybrid processes. Not only the carrier but also low-molecular-weight substances (acetic or propionic acids formed in the bioreactor or introduced from outside) can also act as co-substrates and electron donors and contribute to the course of photocatalytic reactions [76]. Today, the development of hybrid processes depends on the development of three-dimensional carriers characterized as affordable, high strength, biocompatible, porous and reproducible in characteristics.
It should be noted that the effective use of hybrid processes is influenced by temperature and pH. Currently, a significant part of chemical reactions occurring in the presence of NCs do not require the use of extreme temperatures (Table 1), and this allows them to be considered in combination with BCs (Table 2 and Table 3).
The use of sewage with natural microbial consortia, possessing activity at pH 5.5–7.4 (Table 2), can be considered optimal for simultaneous physical–chemical treatment and biodegradation, which generally corresponds to most modern approaches to the degradation of hydrocarbon pollutants using NCs (Table 1). If necessary, the range of operating pH values can be expanded when using microscopic fungi as BCs [78] and synthetic or adapted consortia [42]. Thus, the use of Aspergillus niger cells in combination with NPs of ZS provides 100% destruction of 100 mg/L venzene, 100 mg/L toluene and 100 mg/L xylene w for 1 h at pH 4 [78]. BCs themselves play an important role in achieving the effective destruction of toxicants in the organization and implementation of hybrid processes [81]. It is possible to increase the activity of BCs by combining different cells and enzymes instead of their individual use [66]. This can also help to increase the stability of their action in the extended pH range. The selection of the BCs most suitable for combination, based on a deep knowledge of their properties, certainly underlies the further development of hybrid systems for purification from hydrocarbon pollutants.

References

  1. Kuyukina, M.S.; Krivoruchko, A.V.; Ivshina, I.B. Advanced bioreactor treatments of hydrocarbon-containing wastewater. Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 831.
  2. Carvalho, A.R.C.; Martins, G.; Salvador, A.F.F.; Cavaleiro, A.J. Iron compounds in anaerobic degradation of petroleum hydrocarbons: A review. Microorganisms 2022, 10, 2142.
  3. Kumar, L.; Chugh, M.; Kumar, S.; Kumar, K.; Sharma, J.; Bharadvaja, N. Remediation of petrorefinery wastewater contaminants: A review on physicochemical and bioremediation strategies. Process Saf. Environ. Prot. 2022, 159, 362–375.
  4. Olajire, A.A. Recent advances on the treatment technology of oil and gas produced water for sustainable energy industry-mechanistic aspects and process chemistry perspectives. Chem. Eng. J. Adv. 2020, 4, 100049.
  5. Ouriache, H.; Arrar, J.; Namane, A.; Bentahar, F. Treatment of petroleum hydrocarbons contaminated soil by Fenton like oxidation. Chemosphere 2019, 232, 377–386.
  6. Wagner, A.M.; Barker, A.J. Distribution of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) from legacy spills at an Alaskan Arctic site underlain by permafrost. Cold Reg. Sci. Technol. 2019, 158, 154–165.
  7. Gao, H.; Wu, M.; Liu, H.; Xu, Y.; Liu, Z. Effect of petroleum hydrocarbon pollution levels on the soil microecosystem and ecological function. Environ. Pollut. 2022, 293, 118511.
  8. EPA Industrial Wastewater Treatment Technology United States Environmental Protection Agency. Available online: https://www.epa.gov/eg/study-oil-and-gas-extraction-wastewater-management (accessed on 20 March 2023).
  9. Dharma, H.N.C.; Jaafar, J.; Widiastuti, N.; Matsuyama, H.; Rajabsadeh, S.; Othman, M.H.D.; Rahman, M.A.; Jafri, N.N.M.; Suhaimin, N.S.; Nasir, A.M.; et al. A review of titanium dioxide (TiO2)-based photocatalyst for oilfield-produced water treatment. Membranes 2022, 12, 345.
  10. Amakiri, K.T.; Canon, A.R.; Molinari, M.; Angelis-Dimakis, A. Review of oilfield produced water treatment technologies. Chemosphere 2022, 298, 134064.
  11. Zhang, J.; Chan, K.K.J.; Chan, W. Synergistic Interaction of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, phthalate esters, or phenol on DNA adduct formation by aristolochic acid I: Insights into the etiology of Balkan endemic nephropathy. Chem. Res. Toxicol. 2022, 35, 849–857.
  12. Wang, W.; Liu, Y.; Yu, S.; Wen, X.; Wu, D. Highly efficient solar-light-driven photocatalytic degradation of pollutants in petroleum refinery wastewater on hierarchically-structured copper sulfide (CuS) hollow nanocatalysts. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2022, 284, 120254.
  13. Sliem, M.; Salim, A.; Mohamed, G. Photocatalytic degradation of anthracene in aqueous dispersion of metal oxides nanoparticles: Effect of different parameters. J. Photochem. Photobiol. A 2019, 371, 327–335.
  14. Azmoon, P.; Farhadian, M.; Pendashteh, A.; Tangestaninejad, S. Adsorption and photocatalytic degradation of oilfield produced water by visible-light driven superhydrophobic composite of MIL-101 (Cr)/Fe3O4-SiO2: Synthesis, characterization and optimization. Appl. Surf. Sci. 2023, 613, 155972.
  15. Lu, C.; Hong, Y.; Liu, J.; Gao, Y.; Ma, Z.; Yang, B.; Ling, W.; Waigi, M.G. A PAH-degrading bacterial community enriched with contaminated agricultural soil and its utility for microbial bioremediation. Environ. Pollut. 2019, 251, 773–782.
  16. Mu, L.; Zhou, Q.; Zhao, Y.; Liu, X.; Hu, X. Graphene oxide quantum dots stimulate indigenous bacteria to remove oil contamination. J. Hazard. Mater. 2019, 366, 694–702.
  17. Thorat, B.N.; Sonwani, R.K. Current technologies and future perspectives for the treatment of complex petroleum refinery wastewater: A review. Bioresour. Technol. 2022, 355, 127263.
  18. Tetteh, E.K.; Rathilal, S.; Naidoo, D.B. Photocatalytic degradation of oily waste and phenol from a local South Africa oil refinery wastewater using response methodology. Sci. Rep. 2020, 10, 8850.
  19. Ye, T.; Qi, W.; An, X.; Liu, H.; Qu, J. Faceted TiO2 photocatalytic degradation of anthraquinone in aquatic solution under solar irradiation. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 688, 592–599.
  20. Salih, F.; Sakhile, K.; Shaik, F.; Lakkimsetty, N. Treatment of petroleum wastewater using synthesisedhaematite (α-Fe2O3) photocatalyst and optimisation with response surface methodology. Int. J. Environ. Anal. Chem. 2022, 102, 6732–6751.
  21. Al-Hasani, H.; Al-Sabahi, J.; Al-Ghafri, B.; Al-Hajri, R.; Al-Abri, M. Effect of water quality in photocatalytic degradation of phenol using zinc oxide nanorods under visible light irradiation. J. Water Process Eng. 2022, 49, 103121.
  22. Bharati, R.; Suresh, S. Green synthesis of ZnO/SiO2 nanocatalyst with palash leaves extract for treatment of petrochemical wastewater. Advan. Mater. Proc. 2018, 3, 31–35.
  23. Rachna; Rani, M.; Shanker, U. Degradation of tricyclic polyaromatic hydrocarbons in water, soil and river sediment with a novel TiO2 based heterogeneous nanocomposite. J. Environ. Manag. 2019, 248, 109340.
  24. Huang, J.; Zhou, T.; Zhao, W.; Cui, S.; Guo, R.; Li, D.; Kadasala, N.R.; Han, D.; Jiang, Y.; Liu, Y.; et al. Multifunctional magnetic Fe3O4/Cu2O-Ag nanocomposites with high sensitivity for SERS detection and efficient visible light-driven photocatalytic degradation of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). J. Colloid. Interface Sci. 2022, 628, 315–326.
  25. Haneef, T.; Ul Mustafa, M.R.; Rasool, K.; Ho, Y.C.; Mohamed Kutty, S.R. Removal of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in a heterogeneous Fenton like oxidation system using nanoscale zero-valent iron as a catalyst. Water 2020, 12, 2430.
  26. Li, Q.; Li, H.Q.; Rao, Q.; Yang, P. 3O4 based heterogeneous electro-Fenton process for the concentrated liquor of gas field wastewater treatment: Optimization, mechanism, and stability. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 2021, 9, 106407.
  27. Jiang, G.; Wang, X.; Zhu, B.; Gong, J.; Liu, F.; Wang, Y.; Zhao, C. Cl/S co-doped carbon nitride nanotube clusters effectively drive the metal-free photo-Fenton reaction under visible light: A new ROS conversion mechanism. Carbon 2022, 190, 32–46.
  28. Wang, W.; Yao, H.; Yue, L. Supported-catalyst CuO/AC with reduced cost and enhanced activity for the degradation of heavy oil refinery wastewater by catalytic ozonation process. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2020, 27, 7199–7210.
  29. Chen, Y.; Lei, T.; Zhu, G.; Xu, F.; Yang, Z.; Meng, X.; Fang, X.; Liu, X. Efficient degradation of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons over OMS-2 nanorods via PMS activation. Inorg. Chem. Commun. 2023, 149, 110420.
  30. Ahmad, M.; Chen, S.; Ye, F.; Quan, X.; Afzal, S.; Yu, H.; Zhao, X. Efficient photo-Fenton activity in mesoporous MIL-100 (Fe) decorated with ZnO nanosphere for pollutants degradation. Appl. Catal. B 2019, 245, 428–438.
  31. Xue, B.; Yu, X.; Yu, R.; Liao, J.; Zhu, W.; Tian, S.; Wang, L. Photocatalytic degradation of marine diesel oil spills using composite CuO/ZrO2 under visible light. J. Environ. Sci. Health A 2020, 55, 1257–1265.
  32. Ma, W.; Zhang, S.; Deng, L.; Zhong, D.; Li, K.; Liu, X.; Li, J.; Zhang, J.; Ma, J. Cu-based perovskite as a novel CWPO catalyst for petroleum refining wastewater treatment: Performance, toxicity and mechanism. J. Hazard. Mater. 2023, 448, 130824.
  33. Nzila, A.; Ramirez, C.O.; Musa, M.M.; Sankara, S.; Basheer, C.; Li, Q.X. Pyrene biodegradation and proteomic analysis in Achromobacter xylosoxidans, PY4 strain. Int. Biodeter. Biodegr. 2018, 130, 40–47.
  34. Budiyanto, F.; Thukair, A.; Al-Momani, M.; Musa, M.M.; Nzila, A. Characterization of halophilic bacteria capable of efficiently biodegrading the high-molecular-weight polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon pyrene. Environ. Eng. Sci. 2018, 35, 616–626.
  35. Al-Hawash, A.B.; Alkooranee, J.T.; Abbood, H.A.; Zhang, J.; Sun, J.; Zhang, X.; Ma, F. Isolation and characterization of two crude oil-degrading fungi strains from Rumaila oil field, Iraq. Biotechnol. Rep. 2018, 17, 104–109.
  36. Calderón-Delgado, I.C.; Mora-Solarte, D.A.; Velasco-Santamaría, Y.M. Physiological and enzymatic responses of Chlorella vulgaris exposed to produced water and its potential for bioremediation. Environ. Monit. Assess 2019, 191, 399.
  37. Forján, R.; Lores, I.; Sierra, C.; Baragaño, D.; Gallego, J.L.R.; Peláez, A.I. Bioaugmentation treatment of a PAH-polluted soil in a slurry bioreactor. Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 2837.
  38. Al-Thukair, A.A.; Malik, K.; Nzila, A. Biodegradation of selected hydrocarbons by novel bacterial strains isolated from contaminated Arabian Gulf sediment. Sci. Rep. 2020, 10, 21846.
  39. Murygina, V.; Gaydamaka, S.; Gladchenko, M.; Zubaydullin, A. Method of aerobic-anaerobic bioremediation of a raised bog in Western Siberia affected by old oil pollution. a pilot test. Int. Biodeterior. Biodegrad. 2016, 114, 150–156.
  40. Gaydamaka, S.; Murygina, V.; Gladchenko, M. Effect of a preliminary physicochemical treatment of bituminous crusts resulting from oil pollution on the bioremediation of upland swamps with oil decomposers. Russ. J. Phys. Chem. B 2017, 11, 587–593.
  41. Gaydamaka, S.; Gladchenko, M.; Murygina, V. Effect of electron acceptor on hydrocarbon pollution degradation rate caused by bacteria of the genus Rhodococcus under anaerobic conditions. Russ. J. Phys. Chem. B 2020, 14, 160–166.
  42. Al-Mur, B.A.; Pugazhendi, A.; Jamal, M.T. Application of integrated extremophilic (halo-alkalo-thermophilic) bacterial consortium in the degradation of petroleum hydrocarbons and treatment of petroleum refinery wastewater under extreme condition. J. Hazard. Mater. 2021, 413, 125351.
  43. Olowomofe, T.O.; Oluyege, J.O.; Aderiye, B.I.; Oluwole, O.A. Degradation of poly aromatic fractions of crude oil and detection of catabolic genes in hydrocarbon-degrading bacteria isolated from Agbabu bitumen sediments in Ondo State. AIMS Microbiol. 2019, 5, 308.
  44. Jamal, M.T.; Pugazhendi, A. Degradation of petroleum hydrocarbons and treatment of refinery wastewater under saline condition by a halophilic bacterial consortium enriched from marine environment (Red Sea), Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. 3 Biotech. 2018, 8, 276.
  45. Kahla, O.; Garali, S.M.B.; Karray, F.; Abdallah, M.B.; Kallel, N.; Mhiri, N.; Zaghden, H.; Barhoumi, B.; Pringault, O.; Quemeneur, M.; et al. Efficiency of benthic diatom-associated bacteria in the removal of benzo(a)pyrene and fluoranthene. Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 751, 141399.
  46. Obire, O.; Aleruchi, O.; Wemedo, S. Fungi in biodegradation of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in oilfield wastewater. Acta Sci. Microbiol. 2020, 3, 220–224.
  47. Subashchandrabose, S.R.; Venkateswarlu, K.; Venkidusamy, K.; Palanisami, T.; Naidu, R.; Megharaj, M. Bioremediation of soil long-term contaminated with PAHs by algal–bacterial synergy of Chlorella sp. MM3 and Rhodococcus wratislaviensis strain 9 in slurry phase. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 659, 724–731.
  48. Ammar, S.H.; Khadim, H.J.; Mohamed, A.I. Cultivation of Nannochloropsis oculata and Isochrysis galbana microalgae in produced water for bioremediation and biomass production. Environ. Technol. Innov. 2018, 10, 132–142.
  49. Qiao, K.; Tian, W.; Bai, J.; Wang, L.; Zhao, J.; Song, T.; Chu, M. Removal of high-molecular-weight polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons by a microbial consortium immobilized in magnetic floating biochar gel beads. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2020, 159, 111489.
  50. Zhou, H.; Chen, C.; Zhou, S.; Bu, K.; Li, P.; Lin, X.; Jiang, L.; Zhang, C. Performance and microbial community analysis of a bio-contact oxidation reactor during the treatment of low-COD and high-salinity oilfield produced water. Bioresour. Technol. 2021, 335, 125267.
  51. Abed, R.M.; Al-Fori, M.; Al-Sabahi, J.; Prigent, S.; Headley, T. Impacts of partially hydrolyzed polyacrylamide (HPAM) on microbial mats from a constructed wetland treating oilfield produced water. Chemosphere 2021, 285, 131421.
  52. Magalhães, E.R.; Costa Filho, J.D.; Padilha, C.E.; Silva, F.L.; Sousa, M.A.; Santos, E.S. Activated sludge treatment for promoting the reuse of a synthetic produced water in irrigation. J. Environ. Sci. Health-B Pestic. Food Contam. Agric. Wastes 2021, 56, 132–141.
  53. Zhang, L. Advanced treatment of oilfield wastewater by a combination of DAF, yeast bioreactor, UASB, and BAF processes. Sep. Sci. Technol. 2021, 56, 779–788.
  54. Hasanzadeh, R.; Souraki, B.A.; Pendashteh, A.; Khayati, G. Application of isolated halophilic microorganisms suspended and immobilized on walnut shell as biocarrier for treatment of oilfield produced water. J. Hazard. Mater. 2020, 400, 123197.
  55. Chen, J.; Liu, Y.F.; Zhou, L.; Irfan, M.; Hou, Z.W.; Li, W.; Mbadinga, S.M.; Liu, J.F.; Yang, S.Z.; Wu, X.L.; et al. Long-chain n-alkane biodegradation coupling to methane production in an enriched culture from production water of a high-temperature oil reservoir. AMB Express 2020, 10, 63.
  56. Maslova, O.; Senko, O.; Stepanov, N.; Gladchenko, M.; Gaydamaka, S.; Akopyan, A.; Eseva, E.; Anisimov, A.; Efremenko, E. Formation and use of anaerobic consortia for the biotransformation of sulfur-containing extracts from pre-oxidized crude oil and oil fractions. Bioresour. Technol. 2021, 319, 124248.
  57. Maslova, O.; Senko, O.; Stepanov, N.; Gladchenko, M.; Gaydamaka, S.; Akopyan, A.; Eseva, E.; Anisimov, A.; Efremenko, E. Sulfur containing mixed wastes in anaerobic processing by new immobilized synthetic consortia. Bioresour. Technol. 2022, 362, 127794.
  58. Gutiérrez, M.; León, A.; Duel, P.; Bosch, R.; Piña, M.; Morey, J. Effective elimination and biodegradation of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons from seawater through the formation of magnetic microfibres. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2021, 22, 17.
  59. Cheng, H.; Li, Z.; Li, Y.; Shi, Z.; Bao, M.; Han, C.; Wang, Z. Multi-functional magnetic bacteria as efficient and economical Pickering emulsifiers for encapsulation and removal of oil from water. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 2020, 560, 349–358.
  60. Alabresm, A.; Chen, Y.P.; Decho, A.W.; Lead, J. A novel method for the synergistic remediation of oil-water mixtures using nanoparticles and oil-degrading bacteria. Sci. Total Environ. 2018, 630, 1292–1297.
  61. Corvini, N.; El Idrissi, M.; Dimitriadou, E.; Corvini, P.F.X.; Shahgaldian, P. Hydrophobicity-responsive engineered mesoporous silica nanoparticles: Application in the delivery of essential nutrients to bacteria combating oil spills. Chem. Comm. 2019, 55, 7478.
  62. Moser, P.; Ricci, B.; Reis, B.; Neta, L.; Cerqueira, A.; Amaral, M. Effect of MBR-H2O2/UV Hybrid pre-treatment on nanofiltration performance for the treatment of petroleum refinery wastewater. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2018, 192, 176–184.
  63. Eryılmaz, C.; Genc, A. Review of treatment technologies for the removal of phenol from wastewaters. J. Water Chem. Technol. 2021, 43, 145–154.
  64. Liu, B.; Chen, B.; Zhang, B. Oily wastewater treatment by nano-TiO2-induced photocatalysis: Seeking more efficient and feasible solutions. IEEE Nanotechnol. Mag. 2017, 11, 4–15.
  65. Yu, M.; Wang, J.; Tang, L.; Feng, C.; Liu, H.; Zhang, H.; Peng, B.; Chen, Z.; Xie, Q. Intimate coupling of photocatalysis and biodegradation for wastewater treatment: Mechanisms, recent advances and environmental applications. Water Res. 2020, 175, 115673.
  66. Liu, K.; Chen, J.; Sun, F.; Liu, Y.; Tang, M.; Yang, Y. Historical development and prospect of intimately coupling photocatalysis and biological technology for pollutant treatment in sewage: A review. Sci. Total Environ. 2022, 835, 155482.
  67. de Oliveira, C.; Viana, M.; Amaral, M. Coupling photocatalytic degradation using a green TiO2 catalyst to membrane bioreactor for petroleum refinery wastewater reclamation. J. Water Process Eng. 2020, 34, 101093.
  68. Balakrishnan, M.; Yadav, S.; Singh, N.; Batra, V.S. Membrane-based hybrid systems incorporating nanomaterials for wastewater treatment. In Nano-Enabled Technologies for Water Remediation, 1st ed.; Kaleekkal, N., Mural, P., Vigneswaran, S., Eds.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2022; pp. 71–144.
  69. Vatanpour, V.; Ağtaş, M.; Abdelrahman, A.M.; Erşahin, M.E.; Ozgun, H.; Koyuncu, I. Nanomaterials in membrane bioreactors: Recent progresses, challenges, and potentials. Chemosphere 2022, 302, 134930.
  70. Wei, Z.; He, Y.; Huang, Z.; Xiao, X.; Li, B.; Ming, S.; Cheng, X.L. Photocatalytic membrane combined with biodegradation for toluene oxidation. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2019, 184, 109618.
  71. Wang, C.; Li, Y.; Tan, H.; Zhang, A.; Xie, Y.; Wu, B.; Xu, H. A novel microbe consortium, nano-visible light photocatalyst and microcapsule system to degrade PAHs. Chem. Eng. J. 2019, 359, 1065–1074.
  72. Cai, H.; Sun, L.; Wang, Y.; Song, T.; Bao, M.; Yang, X. Unprecedented efficient degradation of phenanthrene in water by intimately coupling novel ternary composite Mn3O4/MnO2-Ag3PO4 and functional bacteria under visible light irradiation. Chem. Eng. J. 2019, 369, 1078–1092.
  73. Qin, Z.; Zhao, Z.; Jiao, W.; Han, Z.; Xia, L.; Fang, Y.; Wang, S.; Ji, L.; Jiang, Y. Phenanthrene removal and response of bacterial community in the combined system of photocatalysis and PAH-degrading microbial consortium in laboratory system. Bioresour. Technol. 2020, 301, 122736.
  74. Qin, Z.; Zhao, Z.; Jiao, W.; Han, Z.; Xia, L.; Fang, Y.; Wang, S.; Ji, L.; Jiang, Y. Coupled photocatalytic-bacterial degradation of pyrene: Removal enhancement and bacterial community responses. Environ. Res. 2020, 183, 109135.
  75. Zhong, N.; Yuan, J.; Luo, Y.; Zhao, M.; Luo, B.; Liao, Q.; Chang, H.; Zhong, D.; Rittmann, B.E. Intimately coupling photocatalysis with phenolics biodegradation and photosynthesis. Chem. Eng. J. 2021, 425, 130666.
  76. Zhou, Z.; Jiao, C.; Liang, Y.; Du, A.; Zhang, J.; Xiong, J.; Chen, G.; Zhu, H.; Lu, L. Study on degradation of 1,2,4-TrCB by sugarcane cellulose-TiO2carrier in an intimate coupling of photocatalysis and biodegradation system. Polymers 2022, 14, 4774.
  77. Wang, Y.; Zhu, X.; Gu, Y.; Luo, S.; Li, Y.; Yang, S. Reversible controlled switching of photocatalysis for microorganism protection in the coupling of photocatalysis and biodegradation. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 2023, 11, 109033.
  78. Priyanka, U.; Lens, P.N. Enhanced removal of hydrocarbons BTX by light-driven Aspergillus niger ZnS nanobiohybrids. Enzyme Microb. Technol. 2022, 157, 110020.
  79. Rittmann, B.E. Biofilms, active substrata, and me. Water Research 2018, 132, 135–145.
  80. Lu, Z.; Xu, Y.; Akbari, M.Z.; Liang, C.; Peng, L. Insight into integration of photocatalytic and microbial wastewater treatment technologies for recalcitrant organic pollutants: From sequential to simultaneous reactions. Chemosphere 2022, 295, 133952.
  81. Li, Y.; Chen, L.; Tian, X.; Lin, L.; Ding, R.; Yan, W.; Zhao, F. Functional role of mixed-culture microbe in photocatalysis coupled with biodegradation: Total organic carbon removal of ciprofloxacin. Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 784, 147049.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy.
Upload a video for this entry
Information
Subjects: Biotechnology & Applied Microbiology
Contributors MDPI registered users' name will be linked to their SciProfiles pages. To register with us, please refer to https://encyclopedia.pub/register :
Olga Maslova
,
Olga Senko
,
Marina A. Gladchenko
,
Sergey N. Gaydamaka
,
Elena Efremenko
View Times: 353
Revisions: 3 times (View History)
Update Date: 23 May 2023
Table of Contents
    1000/1000
    Hot Most Recent
    Video Production Service
    Feedback