Water Industry Chemical Investigations CIP1

Transcription

1 Water Industry Chemical Investigations CIP1 25 million - 46 chemicals, 16 sanitary/blm dets, 0.75 million data points Effluent screening -162 sewage works; 5000 samples Process sampling - 26 sewage works; 5000 samples Sewerage catchment sampling - 8 catchments; 8000 samples 10 pilot studies & 14 supporting technical investigations Effluent Comprehensive characterisation Identified highest risk chemicals Log normality distribution confirmed Current treatment Already impressive removal Differences between ASP & PFs Other factors too loading, operation Advanced treatment No single treatment tech effective for all subs Metals most challenging Estimates of financial & carbon costs Sources to sewer Generally domestic dominated With some specific trade influences

2 Water Industry Chemical Investigations CIP2 c 90 million Effluent impact assessment sewage works; environment u/s & d/s; 5 years; 55,000 samples Process sampling - 45 sewage works; 2000 samples including emerging subs Treatment options - 10 large scale CIP1 demos, 3 pilots of innovative tech Catchment studies - 5 catchments; all key sectors; explore catchment solutions Technical investigations including sludge disposal characterisation Environmental impact Evidence of impact PR19 & PR24 planning Options for treatment Practical experience of operational control More robust costing base Emerging subs & current treatment 20 pharmaceuticals Catchment Multiple pollutants with multiple sources and multiple interventions with differing results across substances Are catchment solutions possible? Role of end-of-pipe & source control

3 The Chemicals Strategy Developed with Defra Framework to choose the best intervention / combination of interventions Promotes source control and waste management Evidence based decisions obtain better evidence where needed A focus on new and emerging issues Strategy applied in PR19

4 CIP3 Investigations PR19 Number of investigations planned in PR19 to build on the work in CIP2. These compliment and build on previous CIP investigations. Investigations designed by a collaboration between the water companies and many Environment Agency teams water quality, groundwater, contaminated land, marine, and evidence. These help implement or inform the strategy These investigations will have implications for PR24 and beyond Planned investigations include: Monitoring of chemicals in discharges to ground and TraC waters Investigation of chemical concentrations and fate in sludge Monitoring of long-term trends in chemical concentrations Studies of microplastics and anti-microbial resistance in sewage effluents Studies of sewage catchments to determine sources of specific chemicals Studies of chemical removal by new and existing technologies 4

5 1. Groundwater Investigations Is the chemical composition of groundwater discharges different to those to surface water? Higher BOD equates to higher chemical concentrations. However, these discharges are unlikely to have a high trade content or receive high amounts of urban runoff. Six samples (both effluent & groundwater) over 18 months Minimum of three sites per company 5

6 Discharges to TraC WFD_INV_CHEM2 Is the chemical composition of TraC discharges different to those to surface water? BOD is typically higher in these discharges, so chemical concentrations may be expected to be higher. In addition, some large traders and/or traders with effluents of different composition discharge to TraC waters. Discharges also often have large volumes, so daily loads of chemicals may be expected to be higher than many discharges to surface waters. Effluent-only monitoring of all >25000 PE direct discharges into six high risk estuaries as identified by the Environment Agency. Monthly monitoring for 18 months for chemicals causing EQS failures in those estuaries, or of widespread concern in estuaries. 6

7 Trend Monitoring WFD_MON_CHEM Is source control reducing the concentrations of these substances over time? Is the reduction significant and/or likely to continue? Are any other controls of some/all substances needed? Monitoring of five discharges per company, including one TraC and one from CIP1 and/or CIP2. Influent and effluent spot sampling at operator selfmonitoring (OSM) frequency. Monitoring for the full five years of PR19 and to be subject to further funding in PR24 and beyond. 7

8 AMR WFD_INV_CHEM3 2 million programme of investigations into changes in abundance of AMR genes through wastewater and sludge treatment processes. Are AMR genes in water company effluents an issue and do they need to be controlled? 8

9 6. Microplastics WFD_INV_CHEM5 1million programme of investigations into changes in abundance of microplastics through wastewater and sludge treatment processes. Are microplastics in water company effluents an issue and do they need to be controlled? 9

10 Innovative Pathway Control WFD_INV_CHEM4 Five companies have proposed projects under this driver. e.g: Can sustainable prescribing reduce the level of pharmaceuticals reaching our sewage treatment works and the environment, avoiding or reducing the need to install costly and energy intensive additional treatment processes? Can cypermethrin discharges be reduced through engagement with users such as veterinary, equine, livestock, and agricultural college sites? 10

11 Catchment Investigations WFD_INV_CHEM6 Investigations for HBCDD, cypermethrin and PFOS instead of having permit limits in PR19 Concentrations are frequently high across the country but not in all locations, so sewer catchment investigations will attempt to find sources and look at options for control. In addition, PFOS river surveys will be carried out to try and identify sources other than WwTW. Is there a difference between rural and urban catchments? Are domestic and/or trade inputs significant? 11

12 Sludge Investigations WFD_INV_CHEM67 Does sludge treatment effectively remove the sampled chemicals? Do different sludge treatment processes have different levels of removal? Are some more effective than others? Are any chemicals exceeding Regulatory standards or a cause for concern at the point of disposal to land? Monthly sampling of sludge processes at same sites used for CIP2 sludge investigations for 18 months. Sampling at entry to sludge treatment and at point of disposal to land. 12

13 Effluent and river monitoring for TBT, DEHP and Triclosan WFD_INV_CHEM9 and WFD_INV_CHEM10 Investigations to monitor levels of these substances which have shown a decline between CIP1 and CIP2 Data will be used for PR24 permitting decisions Sampling at works where permit limits would currently be required 13

14 Monitoring of Chemical Removal by Installed Technologies WFD_INV_CHEM11 Expand on the findings of the F&P trials in CIP2 and provide further data to increase confidence in the removal rates of chemicals by different types of technology. No optimisation of the works for chemicals is required. How effective are different types of technology at removing different chemicals? What affects removal rates e.g. influent concentrations, retention times, temperature? Are some types of technology more effective at removing large numbers of chemicals? Companies to sample a combination of plants which: are currently operating, or are being installed in AMP6 to remove P 14

15 Mechanisms of Chemical Removal WFD_INV_CHEM12 Mechanisms of chemical removal, building on the work in the F&P trials. For example: Are chemicals broken down or are they moved into sludge? Is chemical removal by steel slag media associated with elevated ph? Why do different installations of the same technology e.g. sand filters remove chemicals better than others? Understanding of how chemicals are partitioned Optimisation of some technologies 15

16 Technical infeasibility investigations WFD_INV_CHEM13 Investigations into source of substances or optimisation of existing treatment, where achievement of the permit limit, or a significant proportion of it, is not technically feasible 16

17 17 Any Questions?