New anaerobic technologies More biogas at lower costs Jan Pereboom Wastewater, greener and more cost effective Aquavakbeurs, Gorkum, 20 maart 2013
Contents 1. Introduction 2. Novel granular technology: Biobed Advanced 3. Anaerobic MBR: Memthane 4. Retrofit process control: Biobed SMART 5. Conclusions 2
Biothane: competence centre of Veolia Water Veolia Environment Divisions: Energy Services, Waste Management, Water, Transport Revenues 29.6 bln ; 77 countries; 330,000 employees (2011) Veolia Water Revenues 12.6 bln ; 69 countries; 97,000 employees Drinking water for 103 mln consumers; sewage of 73 mln inhabitants Veolia Water Solutions and Technologies Contracting and equipment; 350 proprietary technologies Revenue 2.3 bln ; 135 business units; 10,800 employees Biothane World market leader for Anaerobic industrial wastewater treatment 35 years; 540 references; since 2008 part of Veolia 3 3
Industrial wastewater treatment The current State-of-the-Art: combination of Anaerobic pre-treatment and Aerobic post treatment Biogas Hydraulic buffer tank Anaerobic reactor Aeration tank Surplus sludge 4
Anaerobic versus Aerobic WWT Heat loss CH 4 26-30 Nm 3 CO 2 5-12 Nm 3 100 kg BOD COD Air (O 2 ) to Aerobic 45% Carbon Dioxide 50% Biomass 2-10 kg COD BOD 100 kg COD (25 O C 35 O C) to Anaerobic 75% Biogas (75% Methane) 5% Biomass Aeration (100 kwh) 10-20 kg COD Sludge, 30-60 kg Sludge, 5 kg 1 kg COD removed 0.35 Nm 3 CH 4 or 3.8 kwh 5 5
Biothane s (former) granular technologies Biothane UASB Granular Sludge Bed Up to 10~15 kg COD/m3d Good COD efficiency Good biomass inventory Biobed EGSB Expended Granular Sludge Bed High Rate Process (tall reactors) Low investment costs Small footprint Up to 15~30 kg COD/m3d Soluble COD removal Limited COD efficiency Limited biomass growth 6 6
Kg COD/m3.day & removal % 1 31 61 91 121 151 181 211 241 271 301 331 1 31 61 91 121 151 181 211 241 271 301 Biothane UASB vs. Biobed EGSB COD reduction rate EGSB is equal or lower but Volumetric loading rate is 2-3 x higher 100 Biothane UASB Biobed EGSB 80 60 40 20 0 VLR (kg COD/m3/d) COD removal
2. Novel granular technology: Biobed Advanced Anaerobic granular technology at the next level Reduced investment and operating costs
Biobed Advanced; combining the best of both Advantages of UASB Excellent performance High COD removal efficiency Best biomass inventory Good tolerance for SS + Advantages of EGSB Low investment costs High volumetric loading rates (2-3 x) Tall reactors (2-3 times) Small footprint Solution Biobed Advanced 9
Novel Biobed Advanced Settler Patented new settler and reactor design Multi level biogas separation TTS; Tilted Tube Separator on top of the settler Increasing the settler surface area for Improving the retention of biomass and SS in the reactor Robust effluent pipes; replacing gutters 10
Based on fundamental research 5 years research by committed team Many with more than 25 years of experience Lab scale testing Hydraulic model testing at 1:1 scale Pilot scale testing at 7 m3 Full scale testing and data gathering 11
Objectives of Biobed Advanced Improving the anaerobic performance Thus reducing investment and operating costs hydraulic buffer tank Anaerobic reactor 80 % Aeration tank Improving COD removal rate Hydraulic buffer tank Anaerobic reactor 85 % Aeration tank 10 ~ 25% smaller 12
Biobed Advanced; smaller settler and reactor EGSB Advanced 1.0 m net reactor volume Smaller settler height 1.0 meter lower Same net volume loading rate Higher gross volumetric loading rate Higher applicable liquid upflow velocity Smaller required settler area Reduced settler price Substantial influence on Capex and Opex Lower energy demand 13
Biobed Advance; Optimizing investment and operating costs Compact settler results in more flexible reactor design Optimal size: Diameter = 0.8 x Height Tall is more costly and requires more energy 14
Biobed Advanced; cost comparison old-new Brewery; 1.0 mln HL (Czech) Design flow 900 m3/d and load 4.8 tcod/d Comparison Biobed EGSB vs Biobed Advanced (in mln Euro) Both including aerobic MBR Anaerobic COD removal efficiency increased from 80 to 85 % Anaerobic reactor volume from 300 down to 250 m3 Biobed EGSB aerobic Biobed Advanced aerobic reduction Investment 0.75 0.85 0.65 0.75 Operating 0.20 0.30 0.15 0.25 Overall capex 1.60 1.40 12 % Overall opex 0.50 0.40 20 % 15
Biobed Advanced proven track record Installed full scales: 27 Largest 9000 m3 reactor for 184 tcod/d F&B applications: Distillery; Mexico Breweries; South Korea and USA Dairy; Panama Soya processing; Italy Soft drinks; Thailand Sugar; Egypt Potato; Indonesia, Belgium 38 tcod/d 30 and 19 tcod/d 6.0 tcod/d 9.3 tcod/d 8.1 tcod/d 32 tcod/d 3.0 and 7.2 tcod/d 16
3. Anaerobic MBR: Memthane The preferred solution for high-strength wastewaters resulting in crystal clear effluents
Biothane technologies; non-granular Biobulk CSTR Solid waste digestion With or without sludge recirculation Suitable for high COD / SS / FOG waste(water) Memthane Anaerobic MBR New technology for high strength wastewater Using Cross-flow UF membranes High COD / SS removal efficiencies Pomethane CSTR Palm Oil Mill Effluent 18 18
Dual Anaerobic; preferred approach for potato Sedimentation Sludges + peels treated in suspended Biobulk digester Wastewaters to Biobed Advanced Aerobic post-treatment Biobulk digester 19
Memthane step-by-ste Conditioning of highstrength wastewaters. Influent is fed to the anaerobic bioreactor where the organic components are converted into energy-rich biogas. Cleaning In Place (CIP) After anaerobic treatment, the UF membrane unit separates the clean permeate from the biomass. If required, several polishing techniques are available to further treat the suspended solids free effluent for reuse or recovery of nutrients, while the low COD permeate is often clean enough for direct discharge to sewer. Biomass is returned to the bioreactor, while a small amount of biomass is removed from the system and discharged after dewatering. 20
Memthane ; Features Treat high-strength effluent previously considered untreatable High concentrated streams : COD 15,000 250,000 ppm Superb effluent quality Create product for nutrient recovery (N+P) Maximize renewable green energy production Generates biogas from wastewater Minimizes carbon footprint and water footprint Remove COD efficiency: > 98% Avoids costly aerobic post treatment Generates more biogas Reduced OPEX Reduces disposal costs while generating biogas 21
Impact of membranes on anaerobic process 22
Case study 1; ARLA Aylesbury, UK Contract signed 2012 Memthane for treatment middle-high strength wastewater from milk processing dairy RO for low strength wastewater Scope: Turn Key Supply Value: approx. GBP 2,5 M Start Up: Medio 2013
Case study 2; Carriage House Inc.; USA Bottling of foods jams, jellies, salsa, BBQ sauce, etc Influent Parameters: Flow : 500 m3/d Total COD : 20,000 mg/l Total SS : 2,000 mg/l Sewer requirements 250/250 BOD & TSS Strong fluctuations Design and Build contract Operations 10 year by VWNA 24
Case study 3; Dutch food company Pilot plant: May September 2012 Competition: DAF + conventional anaerobic Memthane (> 99% COD) Turn Key 2.5 mln Veolia Operations 3 year Decision early 2013 25
Memthane ; Track record Proven Innovation 10 full-scale Memthane plants 4 years of full-scale industrial operation 14 pilot plant tests Implemented in: Dairy industries Bio-ethanol plant; thin stillage Cellulosic Bio-ethanol; condensate Biodiesel plant Food processing 26
4. Retrofit process control: Biobed SMART Sludge Management and Reactor control Techniques
Biobed SMART reactor control system (1) Sludge Management and Reactor Control Techniques Objectives : Achieve more stable reactor operation Achieve higher COD removal efficiency Reduce operating costs Dynamic reactor control Measuring online load load control Various online measurements Biogas composition Sludge bed level In-situ sludge activity Result in early warnings 28 28
Objectives of Biobed Advanced & SMART Improving the anaerobic performance Thus reducing investment and operating costs hydraulic buffer tank Anaerobic reactor 80 % Aeration tank Improving COD removal rate Hydraulic buffer tank Dynamic control Anaerobic reactor 85 % Aeration tank 10 ~ 25% smaller 29
kg COD/d kg COD/d % kg/year m3 NG/year Dynamic Control: Client Case-study COD load COD out COD removal Caustic need Energy need 2000 700 100 70000 140000 1500 1000 500 600 500 400 300 200 100 80 60 40 20 60000 50000 40000 30000 20000 10000 120000 100000 80000 60000 40000 20000 0 before after 0 before after 0 before after 0 before after 0 before after + 11% -40% +32% -56% -43% Net Biomass growth Reduction in N-consumption despite of increased average load Stable operation reduced operator and analysis cost 30
Biobed SMART in situ real-time video imaging 31
Observations and Conclusions Biobed Advanced reactor Reduced investment and operating costs Slightly more biogas Memthane AnMBR Cost effective solution for concentrated wastewaters More biogas Biobed SMART control system Substantial reduction in operating costs; slightly more biogas More stable operation Especially as retrofit to existing plants 32
Biothane: Establishing growth through innovation Thanks for your attention For further information or questions Please contact: Jan Pereboom; Marketing Manager at Biothane jan.pereboom@veoliawater.com 33