Annisa Annisa, Difa Az-Zahra, Nur Rifa Ashya, Nor Latifah

Review Jurnal Pengelolaan Limbah Cair Farmasi Dengan Metode Aerob-Anaerob Dalam Penurunan Kadar COD

Introduction

Review jurnal pengelolaan limbah cair farmasi dengan metode aerob-anaerob dalam penurunan kadar cod. Review jurnal pengolahan limbah cair farmasi dengan metode aerob-anaerob. Bandingkan efektivitas penurunan COD & fenol, serta strategi kombinasi optimal untuk lingkungan.

Abstract

Pendahuluan: Limbah cair industri farmasi mengandung senyawa organik kompleks dan bahan toksik yang menyebabkan tingginya nilai Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD). Pengolahan biologis dengan metode aerob dan anaerob menjadi alternatif yang efektif dan ramah lingkungan. Tujuan: Artikel ini bertujuan untuk mereview dan membandingkan efektivitas metode aerob dan anaerob dalam menurunkan kadar COD pada limbah cair farmasi. Metode: Kajian ini dilakukan melalui studi literatur terhadap dua artikel penelitian. Artikel pertama membahas metode anaerob menggunakan lumpur aktif dari pupuk kandang dengan variabel MLSS dan beban fenol. Artikel kedua mengkaji metode aerob dengan sistem biofilter menggunakan media bioball dan variasi waktu tinggal. Hasil: Metode anaerob menurunkan COD sebesar 21,84–55% dan fenol hingga 99,87% pada kondisi optimum. Namun, efisiensi menurun pada beban fenol tinggi atau adanya mikronutrien toksik seperti Cu. Metode aerob menunjukkan efisiensi penurunan COD sebesar 23,04–42,82%, dengan hasil terbaik pada waktu tinggal 8 jam. Sistem biofilter aerob terbukti stabil dan cocok untuk pengolahan limbah dengan beban organik sedang. Kesimpulan: Kedua metode memiliki kelebihan dan keterbatasan masing-masing. Penggunaan metode anaerob cocok untuk beban COD tinggi, sementara metode aerob efektif untuk stabilisasi lanjutan. Kombinasi keduanya direkomendasikan sebagai strategi optimal dalam pengolahan limbah cair farmasi secara berkelanjutan.

Review

This review paper, titled "Review Jurnal Pengelolaan Limbah Cair Farmasi Dengan Metode Aerob-Anaerob Dalam Penurunan Kadar COD," addresses a critical and highly relevant topic in environmental engineering: the biological treatment of pharmaceutical wastewater. The abstract effectively introduces the core problem, highlighting the complexity and toxicity of pharmaceutical effluent, which contributes to high Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) levels. The paper's explicit objective—to review and compare the effectiveness of aerobic and anaerobic methods for COD reduction—is well-defined and positions these biological approaches as environmentally sound alternatives to traditional or less sustainable treatment options. The methodology for this review is described as a literature study, specifically examining two distinct research articles. One article focused on an anaerobic method using activated sludge with variables of MLSS and phenol load, while the other investigated an aerobic biofilter system with bioball media and varying hydraulic retention times. The findings indicate that the anaerobic method achieved COD reductions between 21.84–55% and impressive phenol removal up to 99.87% under optimum conditions. However, a significant limitation was noted with decreased efficiency under high phenol loads or the presence of toxic micronutrients. The aerobic method, on the other hand, demonstrated COD removal efficiencies of 23.04–42.82%, with peak performance at an 8-hour retention time, proving stable for moderate organic loads. While providing a clear comparative summary, the reliance on only two research articles for this review might limit the breadth and generalizability of its conclusions, potentially overlooking a wider spectrum of operational parameters or advanced system configurations. In its conclusion, the paper appropriately identifies the individual strengths and limitations of both aerobic and anaerobic treatment methods. It positions anaerobic treatment as suitable for high COD loads and aerobic treatment as effective for subsequent stabilization, leading to a strong and logical recommendation for a combined aerobic-anaerobicsystem as the optimal and sustainable strategy for comprehensive pharmaceutical wastewater management. This recommendation is well-supported by the complementary nature of the two processes. For future reviews or research in this area, incorporating a more extensive and diverse body of literature, including economic feasibility analyses, and investigating the impact of specific pharmaceutical active compounds on treatment efficiency would undoubtedly enhance the practical applicability and depth of the analysis. Nevertheless, this paper offers a concise and valuable synthesis for those beginning to explore biological treatment solutions for pharmaceutical wastewater.

Full Text

Comments

You need to be logged in to post a comment.