 | Chemical and Bio Engineering Unassessed (inactive) | ||||||
| |||||||
Perhaps the reference to 20 years ago in the first paragraph should be changed to a specific year? Otherwise this will not stay true. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.226.236.233 (talk) 17:49, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
The previous version of the introduction paragraph seemed to suggest that anammox is only a patented ammonium removal method developed by two Dutch researchers. I found it important to stress already here that the primary definition of the word anammox is a natural process occuring in oceans and many other ecosystems. Floresmagon (talk) 12:45, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
a recent because the recent discovery of phototrophic nitrite oxidizers is even more recent, not to speak about nitrifying crenarchaeotes. I don't know if the plant in Germany was the first, the Rotterdam one was also already started up in 2000.
Reactions edit
The article refers to anammox as a stage, but I wonder whether it might be considered a reaction, or a chain of reactions. Unfree (talk) 10:54, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
I am not sure who wrote the bit that anammox bacteria produce methane, but they got the article in Science wrong. In the wastewater treatment plant the anaerobic digester produces the methane. Anammox saves energy due to the fact that it does not need O2 (ergo energy for air compressors) and it does not need external electron donors (expensive methanol). Xommana (talk) 08:06, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Apparently the lady who wrote the New Scientist bit made the first mistake. Anammox process enables the wastewater treatment plant to produce much more methane, however it does not produce it itself. Xommana (talk) 11:05, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
Units edit
In the section on History is stated: "A maximum ammonium removal rate of 0.4 kg N/m3/d was achieved." Do I read the unit wel when the "N" is refering tot Nitrogen? t.vanschaik (talk) 17:08, 25 November 2014 (UTC)