Advances in Wastewater Treatment Technology

Similar documents
We Know Water. AnoxKaldnes. Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor (MBBR) Integrated Fixed-Film Activated Sludge (IFAS) and ANITA Mox Deammonification

AquaNereda Aerobic Granular Sludge Technology

NITROGEN REMOVAL GRANT WEAVER, PE & WWTP OPERATOR PRESIDENT THE WATER PLANET COMPANY. Create Optimal Habitats

GRANULAR ACTIVATED SLUDGE

Presentation Outline

Waste water treatment

SBR PROCESS FOR WASTEWATER TREATMENT

Simultaneous Nutrient Removal: Quantification, Design, and Operation. Leon Downing, Ph.D., PE Donohue & Associates

MBBR Technology: - A cost effective solution for upgrading existing Waste water Treatment Works. Bruno Bigot

Sidestream Treatment Overview. Kam Law, P.E. Beverley Stinson, Ph.D.

Nutrient Removal Processes MARK GEHRING TECHNICAL SALES MGR., BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT

General Operational Considerations in Nutrient and Wet Weather Flow Management for Wastewater Treatment Facilities Part II

THE DEMON ANAMMOX PROCESS: RESOURCE SAVINGS THROUGH SIDE STREAM TREATMENT, AND THE STEPS TOWARDS AN ENERGY NEUTRAL WWTP PRESENTED AT: NC AWWA-WEA 97

AMPC Wastewater Management Fact Sheet Series Page 1

AMPC Wastewater Management Fact Sheet Series Page 1

Wet Weather and Advanced Treatment: Procurement Strategies to Secure the Right Technology

BIOLOGICAL NUTRIENT REMOVAL PROCESSES

We Know Water. AnoxKaldnes. Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor (MBBR) Integrated Fixed-Film Activated Sludge (IFAS) and ANITA Mox Deammonification

by M k h GROVER Degremont

COMPARISON OF SBR AND CONTINUOUS FLOW ACTIVATED SLUDGE FOR NUTRIENT REMOVAL

RE ENGINEERING O&M PRACTICES TO GET NITROGEN & PHOSPHORUS REMOVAL WITHOUT FACILITY UPGRADES

BEING GOOD STEWARDS: IMPROVING EFFLUENT QUALITY ON A BARRIER ISLAND. 1.0 Executive Summary

WWTP Side Stream Treatment of Nutrients Considerations for City of Raleigh s Bioenergy Recovery Project. Erika L. Bailey, PE, City of Raleigh

Preparing for Nutrient Removal at Your Treatment Plant

AquaPASS. Aqua MixAir System. Phase Separator. System Features and Advantages. Anaerobic. Staged Aeration. Pre-Anoxic.

We Know Water. AnoxKaldnes. Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor (MBBR) Integrated Fixed-Film Activated Sludge (IFAS) and ANITA Mox Deammonification

CE421/521 Environmental Biotechnology. Nitrogen and Phosphorus Cycles Lecture Tim Ellis

Contents General Information Abbreviations and Acronyms Chapter 1 Wastewater Treatment and the Development of Activated Sludge

Advantages & Applications of MBBR Technologies

Shortcut Biological Nitrogen Removal for sustainable wastewater treatment and achieving energy neutrality

Sludge recycling (optional) Figure Aerobic lagoon

Research Progress of Nitrogen and Phosphorus Removal in Municipal Sewage

MEMBRANE AERATED BIOFILM REACTOR

Nutrient Removal Optimization at the Fairview WWTP

Advances in Nitrogen and Phosphorus Removal at Low DO Conditions

Altoona Westerly Wastewater Treatment Facility BNR Conversion with Wet Weather Accommodation

Membrane Aerated Biofilms: Who is There, What are They Doing, and Why are They Beneficial

AnoxKaldnes. Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor (MBBR) and Integrated Fixed-Film Activated Sludge (IFAS)

Global Leaders in Biological Wastewater Treatment

Presenters: Rodrigo Pena-Lang, PE (D&B Engineers), Magdalena Gasior, PE (D&B Engineers) and Paul D. Smith, PE (NYCDEP)

Module 17: The Activated Sludge Process - Part III Answer Key

Domestic Waste Water (Sewage): Collection, Treatment & Disposal

RYKI WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT FIRST NEREDA IN POLAND Authors: Joana Doutor, Janusz Sławiński and Bart de Bruin

MEMBRANE AERATED BIOFILM REACTORS OXYGENATED FUN WITH LESS CARBON COST KELLY MARTIN AND SANDEEP SATHYAMOORTHY

Deammonification for Cost-Effective Sidestream Treatment

Carbon Redirection and its Role in Energy Optimization at Water Resource Recovery Facilities

CSR Process Simulations Can Help Municipalities Meet Stringent Nutrient Removal Requirements

Wastewater Treatment Processes

A Battle to Be the Best: A Comparison of Two Powerful Sidestream Treatment Technologies: Post Aerobic Digestion and Anammox

Topics. Advanced Wastewater Treatment Processes. US Federal Regulation. Status of Nutrient Regulation in Texas. Texas 2 nd Effluent Limitations

OWEA Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition Upgrading WRFs for Biological Nutrient Removal. June 25, 2015

ISAM INTEGRATED SURGE ANOXIC MIX

SIMPLE and FLEXIBLE ENERGY SAVINGS And PERFORMANCE ENHANCEMENT for OXIDATION DITCH UPGRADES

BIOLOGICAL PHOSPHOROUS REMOVAL AN OPERATOR S GUIDE

1/11/2016. Types and Characteristics of Microorganisms. Topic VI: Biological Treatment Processes. Learning Objectives:

International Journal of Advance Engineering and Research Development

ONSITE TREATMENT. Amphidrome

WASTEWATER TREATMENT

Activated Sludge Process Control: Nitrification

Sequence Batch Reactor A New Technology in Waste Water Treatment

19. AEROBIC SECONDARY TREATMENT OF WASTEWATER

Oxidation Ditch Technologies

New Developments in BioWin 5.3

Traditional Treatment

James Winslade Instructor, Environmental Resources Training Center Southern Illinois University-Edwardsville

Membrane Biofilm Reactor (MBfR): A New Approach to Denitrification in Wastewater Setting

Chapter 4 Alternatives for Centralized and Satellite Wastewater Treatment Facilities and Sites

Ditches for Energy Efficiency and Improved Nitrogen Removal

Oxidation Ditch Technologies WATER TECHNOLOGIES

Ohio Water Environment Association Present and Future Technologies for Nutrient Removal

BIOSPHERE MOVING BED BIOLOGICAL SYSTEMS

SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT TECHNOLOGY BY COMPLETE WATER SOLUTION BHALERAO HEIGHTS, AKURDI, PUNE

Best Practice in Sewage and Effluent Treatment Technologies

NEW BIOLOGICAL PHOSPHORUS REMOVAL CONCEPT SUCCESSFULLY APPLIED IN A T-DITCH PROCESS WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT

2015 Spring Conference

Designing Single-Sludge Bionutrient Removal Systems

NUTRIENT REMOVAL PROCESSES IN WASTEWATER TREATMENT. We re Glad You re Here!

JTAC Presentation May 18, Nutrient Removal Process Fundamentals and Operation

Upgrade of an Oxidation Ditch Using Bio-Mass Carriers

Andrea Nifong, World Water Works (formerly HRSD) Stephanie Klaus, VT & HRSD

Review of WEFTEC 2016 Challenge & Overview of 2017 Event. Malcolm Fabiyi, PhD, MBA Spencer Snowling, PhD. P.Eng

COMPARISON STUDY BETWEEN INTEGRATED FIXED FILM ACTIVATED SLUDGE (IFAS), MEMBRANE BIOREACTOR (MBR) AND CONVENTIONAL ACTIVATED SLUDGE (AS) PROCESSES

DISCUSSION PAPER. 1 Objective. 2 Design Flows and Loads. Capital Regional District Core Area Wastewater Management Program

The following biological nutrient removal processes were evaluated in detail in the 2016 Liquid Processing Facilities Plan:

Membrane Bio-Reactors (MBRs) The Future of Wastewater Technology, Science and Economy Aspects

Aqua MSBR MODIFIED SEQUENCING BATCH REACTOR

Module 19 : Aerobic Secondary Treatment Of Wastewater. Lecture 24 : Aerobic Secondary Treatment Of Wastewater

ENHANCING THE PERFORMANCE OF OXIDATION DITCHES. Larry W. Moore, Ph.D., P.E., DEE Professor of Environmental Engineering The University of Memphis

20 Years of Nutrient Removal City of Beloit

2015 HDR, Inc., all rights reserved.

Full Scale Testing to Demonstrate Anaerobic Selector Effect for Low Strength Wastewater

Turbo4bio System For the Treatment of Sewage & Organic Effluents

ECO Smart Aerobic Waste Water Treatment System. Optimising the re-use and recycling of waste water

Appendix D JWPCP Background and NDN

Packaged Wastewater Treatment Systems for Individual Homes and Small Communities. Mark Gross Orenco Systems, Inc. Sutherlin, OR USA.

CITY OF LONDON ENVIRONMENTAL & ENGINEERING SERVICES WASTEWATER TREATMENT OPERATIONS DIVISION

General Information on Nitrogen

Choices to Address Filamentous Growth

ANITA Mox MBBR. Simon Piveteau, M. Christensson, B. Bigot, R. Lemaire, L. Rohold, B. Nussbaum, J. Ochoa

Transcription:

MWEA Annual Conference June 20, 2017 Advances in Wastewater Treatment Technology Nathan Cassity, Donohue

Presentation Agenda History of Activated Sludge Process Advancement & Current Status Future Challenges Innovative Technologies Hypothetical Case Study for West Chicago, IL Conclusions

Early Sanitation Once upon a time Human waste & animal manure were simply returned to land to be used as fertilizers Industrial revolution of 20th century Increased population growth and urbanization Cesspools were constructed to treat increased sewage Rivers became septic producing H2S The Great Stink of 1858 : Thames River in London

Early Sanitation Interceptor sewers + Sewage Farms Development of processes to extract nutrients from sewage for irrigation ABC Process (alum, blood, and clay) Septic tanks Travis Colloider' or Hydrolytic Tank Imhoff Tank Obnoxious and imposed health hazards Aerobic conditions to avoid undesirable malodors

1914 Origins of Activated Sludge In 1913 Dr. Fowler (University of Manchester) Lawrence Experimental Station in Massachusetts Purification of sewage in 24 hours in aerated bottles Ardern & Lockett repeated wastewater aeration experiments back in Manchester Sludge was left in the bottle & mixed with new batch Active role of sludge formed during aeration Activated Sludge Published three papers which formed design basis

Activated Sludge - Principles Retention of solids in aeration basin (RAS) Excess sludge wasting (WAS) Solids separation SRT BOD removal, nitrification MLSS Effluent

Activated Sludge Process Advancement BOD Removal BOD Removal + Nitrification BOD Removal + Nitrification + Selectors BOD Removal + Nitrification + TN & TP Removal Nitrification Unnecessary High-rate systems with short SRTs Aquatic toxicity Systems with longer SRTs Sludge Bulking Use of Selectors to Bio-select Microorganisms Eutrophication Unaerated zones Increasing Process Complexities

Existing Treatment Schemes Nitrification Conventional ASP Trickling Filters Oxidation Ditches SBRs BAF MBRs IFAS, MBBR Fluidized Beds TN Removal MLE Bardenpho Oxidation Ditches SBRs Biological Filters MBRs IFAS, MBBR Deep Bed Sand Filters Upflow Fluidized Beds Lots of Variations Sitespecific Evaluation TP Removal CPR A/O PhoStrip SBRs MBRs Deep Bed Sand Filters TN & TP Removal A2/O Modified Bardenpho UCT/ MUCT VIP Jo burg SBRs PhoStrip MBRs IFAS, MBBR Deep Bed Sand Filters

Challenges More Stringent Effluent Limits Limits of Technology (LOT) More chemicals (ferric, alum, methanol, polymers, etc.) More energy consumption (carbon footprint, GHG emissions) More sludge production More land requirements Resource Scarcity Increasing water demand but limited supply Utilize treated effluent, gray water Phosphorus is limited and irreplaceable 200 years supply at current consumption Increasing energy costs Renewable energy generation

Paradigm Shift

Paradigm Shift

Innovative Technologies Membrane Aerated Biofilm Reactors (MABR) Anaerobic Membrane Bioreactor Anaerobic Migrating Blanket Reactor ANAMMOX Bacteria Aerobic Granular Sludge Membrane Fuel Cells Biomass Immobilization Vacuum Rotation Membrane and more

MABR (Membrane Aerated Biofilm Reactor) Oxygen diffusion through hollow fiber membrane Biofilm Development Aerobic Anoxic outside wall inside BOD along with SND ~ 95% reduction in energy 30%-50% reduction in sludge Sealed end of membrane Biofilm Microporous Hollow fiber membrane

MABR (Membrane Aerated Biofilm Reactor) Courtesy: Emefcy Spiral Aerobic Biofilm Reactor (SABRE)

MABR (Membrane Aerated Biofilm Reactor) Parameter Valve Units Design Temperature 18 (64) o C ( o F) Wastewater Flow 1000 (0.26) m 3 /d (MGD) Influent Filtered BOD 150 mg/l Influent TKN 52 mg/l Effluent BOD 8 mg/l Effluent NH-3 Req. 1.0 mg/l

MABR (Membrane Aerated Biofilm Reactor) Process SABRE Activated Sludge Units Power Consumption 1.2 13 kw Normalized Energy 0.06 (0.03) 1.10 (0.5) kwh/kg BOD (kwh/lb BOD) Normalized Energy 0.02 (0.06) 0.31 (1.18) kwh/m 3 (kwh/1000 gal) Power consumption reduction 95%

MABR (Membrane Aerated Biofilm Reactor)

MABR (Membrane Aerated Biofilm Reactor)

MABR (Membrane Aerated Biofilm Reactor)

Microbial Fuel Cells High-throughput treatment compared to anaerobic digestion 700 kwh energy recovery potential per 1000 kg BOD removed Reduced cost through automated process control Small, enclosed modular design for customer facility compatibility BOD treatment range 1,000-10,000 mg/l influent Excellent way for customer to bolster green marketing initiatives

Scaled-up Design Concept

Biomass Immobilization Biofilms Attached Growth Current form immobilized biomass Sand, gravel, Plastic, etc. Trickling filter, MBBR, IFAS Biocatalyst Capture pure cultures of microorganisms in activated sludge in gel pellets Use entrapped bacteria for wastewater treatment

Biocatalysts Nitrification Long SRT More Tank Volume High Oxygen demand High sensitive demand to ph, temperature Denitrification High carbon demand Activated Sludge Conventional Design Pure Cultures Mixed bacteria population Heterotrophs predominant Only ~ 4% nitrifiers (AOB, NOBs) Traditional Denitrification 2 step process w/carbon High reaction rates Nitrification ~ 16 times Denitrification ~ 3 times Increased process stability No washout of nitrifiers Low sludge production Low carbon source need

Biocatalyst Operation BOD Oxidation Paracoccus sp., Pseudomonas sp. Nitrification Nitrosomonas europaea, Nitrobacter and Nitrospira sp. Denitrification Paracoccus sp., Pseudomonas denitrificans Courtesy: Lentikats Biotechnology

Biocatalysts

Biocatalysts

Biocatalysts Project Process Tonnage Year WWTP Baxter Denitrification (tertiary treatment) 5.4 2009 WWTP Litomerice Nitrification (reject water) 1.5 2010 Tona Denitrification (tertiary treatment) 0.5 2010 WWTP Ostrov u M. Denitrification (tertiary treatment) 0.5 2011 Kyocera BOD removal 5.5 2012 Coral-shop Nitrogen removal (inoculation) 0.1 2012 BASF Nitrogen removal testing 2014 Dairy production BOD removal testing 2014

Biocatalysts

Biocatalyst Usage Nitrification Immobilized bacteria strains Nitrosomonas europaea, Nitrobacter and Nitrospira sp. Operation in oxic conditions Denitrification Immobilized bacteria strains Paracoccus sp. or Pseudomonas denitrificans BOD Removal Immobilized bacteria strains Paracoccus sp., Pseudomonas sp. Operation in oxic conditions Selective biodegradation R&D immobilized bacteria strains, fungi or enzymes

Biocatalysts Reference Baxter Bioscience

Biocatalysts Benefits of Lentikats Biotechnology biocatalysts Pure cultures = smaller tank volumes Lower energy consumption Lower carbon need for denitrification Lower sludge production Better process stability fluctuating influent Resistant to toxic conditions (NH4 ~ 4,000 mg/l) Industrial WW w/ nutrient deficiencies

Granular Activated Sludge Granules - dense & compact biomass No support media Excellent settling properties High MLSS (up to 15,000 mg/l) ~ 75% smaller footprint No bulking sludge >25-35% energy savings Efficient aeration Lower pumping Lower construction, O&M costs Utilize existing tanks No chemicals for nutrient removal Low sludge production Activated Sludge Aerobic Granules

Granular Biomass Oxygen gradient in granule Diffusion controlled Simultaneous BOD, N and P removal

Aerobic Granular Sludge Aerobic Granules Min. diameter 0.212 mm (0.0083 inch) SVI 5 of granular SVI30 of activated sludge sludge High setting rates 25 40 ft/hr granules 1.5 5 ft/hr activated sludge

Nereda Four basins operated in series One basin in sedimentation mode One basin in fill/decant Continuous flow No moving decanter No mixers Granule Sequencing Batch Reactor (GSBR)

Nereda Installations

Conclusions Stricter limits Energy neutrality Sludge minimization Resource recovery CAPEX/OPEX reduction Beneficial reclaimed water re-use Driving technological innovation

References History of Activated Sludge http://www.iwa100as.org/history.php J. L. Barnard and D. H. Stensel, "The Activated Sludge Process in Service of Humanity" US EPA Emerging Technologies for Wastewater Treatment and In- Plant Wet Weather Management Lentikats - http://www.lentikats.eu/cs/ Emefcy - http://www.emefcy.com/ Arbsource - http://www.arbsource.us/

Questions? Nathan Cassity (920) 803-7370 ncassity@donohue-associates.com