Phenol removal from complex wastewaters — Which biocatalyst strategies are documented for degrading phenols in hospital, laboratory, and coal-to-coke processing effluents?

Introduction / Context:
Phenolic compounds are toxic and persistent in many industrial and clinical effluents. Biocatalytic approaches using fungi and bacteria can achieve effective phenol degradation when configured as immobilized or adsorbed systems to withstand toxicity and hydraulic shear.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Immobilization enhances stability and reusability of biocatalysts.
• Aureobasidium pullulans and Pseudomonas spp. are reported phenol degraders under appropriate conditions.
• Support matrices (asbestos historically; anthracite coal; alginate) have been used to retain biomass.

Concept / Approach:
Both fungal and bacterial routes can mineralize phenol. Adsorbed or entrapped cells experience reduced washout and may tolerate inhibitory spikes better. The question cites specific historical configurations that have been described in the literature for phenol-laden effluents from hospitals, labs, and coking operations.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:
Papers and process notes in environmental biotech describe immobilized Pseudomonas and selected fungi for phenol removal, often achieving higher tolerance and kinetics than freely suspended cells.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

• Phanerochaete chrysosporium is a strong lignin degrader and can attack phenolics, but the option claims exclusivity regardless of conditions, which is inaccurate versus the documented systems.
• Abiotic UV alone is unreliable for complete mineralization of phenols in these complex matrices.

Common Pitfalls:
Assuming a single “best” organism; in practice, matrix choice, loading rates, and toxicity dictate which immobilized system performs best.

Final Answer:
Both (a) and (b)