Operation. Nutrient Removal

Transcription

1 Operation

2 Operations Overview External carbon for denitrification and EBPR Sources and evaluation Control Online control of chemical addition Denitrification Phosphorus Operation under extreme conditions Information dissemination

3 Operation MS ID Status SUB/PI 102 External Carbon Workshop Completed Gu, Stinson, Sandino 105 External Carbon Evaluation Protocol Completed Gu, Sandino T-126 External Carbon Protocol Outreach In progress Sandino, Tsuchihashi, Gu T-125 BNR/ENR process control using In progress CT DEP, Tsuchihashi online instrumentation 133 Fermenters for EBPR (review and In progress Rabinowitz needs) X27 Alternative carbon evaluation full scale In progress CT DEP, Brown, Chandran, X33 Innovative carbon source for enhancing denitrification in municipal WWTP In progress Tsuchihashi Makinia, Czerwionka (Gdansk, Poland), Stensel 129 Chemical Process Control In progress TBD - Pinery, CdA, Spokane, DCWater, HRSD, Other X23 Cold/Wet Weather Impacts Planned X28 Operational strategies for GHG Planned management X21A Alternative substrates for EBPR Future (excluding fermenters) X22 Information/Technology Exchange Future Wikipedia X41 SOPs for various items Future X21 Alternative substrates for EBPR Future (including fermenters)

4 Alternative Carbon Workshop Objective Benefit/Outcome Collaboration Establish the approach for the Alternative Carbon Evaluation Protocol Assessment and documentation of current knowledge Agreement on the general approach and outlines for the development of the Protocol Roadmap for process control Workshop presenters Researcher A. Gu, B. Stinson, J. Sandino Completion December 12-13,

5 Alternative Carbon Protocol Objectives Benefit/Outcome Activities/ Deliverables Developing Standard Evaluation Protocol - Comprehensive review and summary of denitrification - Roadmap and framework for consistent evaluation - Description of standardized methods to evaluate external carbon alternatives - Facilitates experience sharing amongst users - Protocol published May Selecting Best Carbon for Denitrification: WEFTEC 10 workshop - Continuing to external carbon information dissemination

6 Collaboration - Nutrient Compendium and Carbon Augmentation Testing protocol. - Carbon Augmentation Cooperative Researcher/ - April Gu (NE Univ) Support - Annalisa Onnis-Hayden (NE Univ) - R. Tsuchihashi, M. Laquidara, B. Stinson (Core Team) - External reviewers Project Period

7

8 Process Road Map

9 Example Pre-Screening phase: Identified 3 possible C- alternatives Testin g phase Result s Decisio n phase: COD/N = 3.5 Y H = 0.3 Θ = 1.1 K S = 20 mg/l SDNR max = 3.8 gn/gvss/h Acclimatization needed Den. efficiency 99.9% COD/N = 3.9 Y H = 0.4 Θ = 1.03 K S = 45 mg/l SDNR max = 3.7 gn/gvss/h No acclimatization needed Den. efficiency 98.9% COD/N = 3.8 Y H = 0.41 Θ = 1.04 K S = 30 mg/l SDNR max =3.5mgN/gV SS/h No acclimatization needed Den. efficiency 98% Plant A Experience very low temperature Eliminate #1 Need a consistent source throughout the year Select #2 Plant B Need a consistent source throughout the year Eliminate #3 (or evaluate storage for alternative #3) Experience period of high flow (reduced HRT) and simulation have shown reduced efficiency with alt. #2 due Nutrient to high Removal

10 Compilation/Dissemination of BNR Carbon Augmentation Information Objectives Benefit/Outcome Activities/ Deliverables Facilitate Knowledge Transfer - Easy access of information to stakeholders - Readily useful WERF product - Facilitates experience sharing amongst users - Potential cost reduction and improvements in effluent quality for wastewater utilities - Webcast for Carbon Augmentation Testing Protocol Training - Carbon Augmentation Workshops for WEFTEC 10 and Biofilm Conference 2010

11 Collaboration - Nutrient Compendium and Carbon Augmentation Testing protocol. - Carbon Augmentation Cooperative Potential - April Gu (NE University) Researcher - Julian Sandino (Core Team) Project Period 2009

12 Fermenters, alternative substrates for EBPR (review and needs) Objective Benefit/Outcome Collaboration Researcher Project Period Facilitate knowledge transfer Documentation of the state of knowledge (compendium) Disseminate the current knowledge of alternative substrates for EBPR WEF MOP authors B. Rabinowitz, JB Neethling (Core Team) (in progress) 12

13 BNR/ENR Process Control with Online Instrumentation Objective Evaluate online instrumentation Evaluate potentials to process control Benefit/Outcome Allow general comparison between instruments being installed in CT Document maintenance requirement and performance Roadmap for process control Collaboration CT DEP and their wastewater treatment plants Researcher Core Team (Tsuchihashi et al) Project Period

14 Study Focus (Phase 1 study) Accuracy of measurement Comparison with wet-analysis data Comparison with other probes Appropriate installation, location(s) of analyzers Maintenance requirements, ease of use Frequency of calibration Frequency of probe clean-up Data collection and compilation Potential for process control Connectivity to SCADA Control of: DO concentration External carbon dosing rate Operating modes/conditions

15 Example: Comparison with lab data Probe readings, mg-n/l Probe = x(Lachat) R 2 = Lachat data, mg-n/l

16 Use of Analyzers for Process Control (Phase 2 study) Ammonia analyzer: Nitrification (aeration) Denitrification (carbon addition) NOx analyzer: Nitrification (aeration) Denitrification (carbon addition) Denitrification (recycling rate) DO/ORP analyzer: Nitrification (aeration) Denitrification (carbon addition)

17 Example: Enfield (from M. Serra: WERF Stakeholder Meeting, 2009)

18 Alternative carbon evaluation full scale Objective Benefit/Outcome Collaboration Researcher Data collection using External Carbon Evaluation Protocol Allow general comparison between studies Evaluate the protocol (potentially further improve the protocol) Stamford WPCA (CT), J. Makinia (Poland), April Gu Other wastewater treatment plants Jeannette Brown, Kartik Chandran Project Period

19 Goal and Funding Goal develop and optimize at full-scale, strategies for costeffective biological nitrogen removal using external carbon sources Funding Connecticut DEP and WERF In-kind Services-Stamford WPCA and Columbia University

20

21 Methodology The methodology used to achieve the above objectives will be first to characterize the nitrogen removal performance, denitrification kinetics and active fraction for each COD source followed by process model development, calibration and validation

22 Alternative Carbon Evaluation Distillery Waste Objectives Evaluating distillery waste for supplemental carbon Benefit/Outcome - Carbon Augmentation Cooperative - Using the External Carbon Evaluation Protocol Researcher - J. Makinia (Poland) - David Stensel (Core Team) Project Period

23 Innovative carbon source for enhancing denitrification in municipal WWTP Jacek Makinia, Kris Czerwionka, Katarzyna Jankowska, Marek Swinarski Gdansk University of Technology, Gdansk, Poland Scientific Committee Jan Oleszkiewicz, University of Manitoba H. David Stensel, University of Washington, (WERF Nutrient Challenge) Krishna Pagilla, Illinois Institute of Technology Hansruedi Siegrist, EAWAG (Switzerland) Funded by European Regional Development Fund

24 Project approach 1. Bench scale testing to observe acclimation to fusel oil. 2. Determine the biological denitrification kinetics using 3. Characterize the degrading microbial population by molecular methods 2011 to Incorporate results into BNR activated sludge model 5. Use model to develop feeding strategy and testing at full scale facility in Gdansk

25 MUCT 570,000 PE Baltic Sea Poland Komers Int. Distillery Sobieski Distillery Figure 2 Location of the distilleries and studied WWTP in Gdansk

26 Current Results -acclimation period required -Degradation kinetics for fusel oil similar to that for ethano -Model development accomplished NUR, mg N/(g VSS. h) y = 0.69e 0.129x R 2 = 0.87 y = 0.70e 0.125x R 2 = 0.90 R1 (ethanol) R2 (fusel oil) Time, d 26

27 Chemical Process Control Objective Benefit/Outcome Collaboration Potential Researcher Project Period 2011 Facilitate knowledge transfer for chemical phosphorus removal process control Documentation of the state of knowledge, compilation of operational experiences, known operational issues, and unknowns Pinery, CdA, Spokane, DCWater, HRSD, Other TBD - JB Neethling (Core Team) 27

28 Cold/Wet Weather Impacts Objective Benefit/Outcome Collaboration Potential Researchers Completion Knowledge sharing for the operators and designers dealing with the cold/wet weather impacts on biological nutrient removal processes Documentation of the state of knowledge. Compendium or white paper level. WWTP operators, designers, ongoing WERF program TBD - B. Hill et al R. Tsuchihashi (Core team) Planned/Opportunistic 28

29 Operational Strategies for GHG Management Objective Benefit/Outcome Operational issues and process control/optimization for GHG management Documentation of the state of knowledge. Focus on operational issues Collaboration Potential Researchers Completion TBD - K. Chandran TBD Planned 29

30 Alternative substrates for EBPR (excluding fermentate) Objective Benefit/Outcome Collaboration Better understanding of alternative substrates for EBPR Documentation of the state of knowledge Potential and concerns with external substrates other than fermentate for phosphorus removal Focus on design and operational issues Follow up on B. Rabinowitz work Potential Researchers Project Period TBD - B. Rabinowitz et al. Future 30

31 Information Exchange/Technology sharing - Wikipedia for Operators Objective Benefit/Outcome Collaboration Potential Researcher Project Period Website host knowledge base for operators and engineers. Highest ranking request from Operators at stakeholder meeting. Phased approach. Accessible, updated information for operators. Long term project. IWA - tbd - J.Sandino/ R. Tsuchihashi (Core Team) Future (Opportunistic) Operations

32 SOPs for various items Objective Benefit/Outcome Collaboration Researcher Project Period Documentation of the standard operating procedures for various nutrient removal processes Collaboration with WEF Contribution to the development of SOPs for selected topics WEF TBD (J. Sandino, Core Team) Future (Opportunistic) 32

33 Alternative substrates for EBPR (including fermentate) Objective Benefit/Outcome Collaboration Potential Researchers Project Period Better understanding of alternative substrates for EBPR Documentation of the state of knowledge Potential and concerns with external substrates other than fermentate. Follow up on B. Rabinowitz work. More general than the option focusing on substrates other than fermentate TBD TBD - B. Rabinowitz et al. Future 33

34 Open Discussion What s missing in research agenda? Sidestream treatment operations (documentation) Operation issues for phosphorus removal (some are on the way) External carbon for EBPR (in progress) Phosphorus control and phosphorus limitation (planned) Operation of attached growth processes Operational issues for new and emerging technologies Prioritization of research projects Identify potential opportunities for collaboration Ongoing/future projects Individuals