Defining the Benefits of Harvesting Phosphorus from Dewatering Filtrate

Similar documents
Preparing for Nutrient Removal at Your Treatment Plant

Innovations in Nitrogen and Phosphorus Removal

4 Angles. Pilot-scale Evaluation of AirPrex for Phosphorus Management. Innovation Program Phosphorus Initiative JTAC 4/22/2017

PHOSPHORUS RECOVERY FROM SEWAGE SLUDGE USING THE AQUACRITOX SUPERCRITICAL WATER OXIDATION PROCESS

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

JTAC Presentation May 18, Nutrient Removal Process Fundamentals and Operation

Struvia Technology for Phosphorus Recovery. o Re-Water Braunschweig November 2015

Closing the Gap Reaching for Energy Independence in Water Reclamation

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

Prepared by the Operation of Municipal Wastewater Treatment Plants Task Force of the Water Environment Federation

So You ve Removed Your Phosphorus? Now What? JTAC Luncheon April 9 th, 2014

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

EVALUATING ALTERNATIVES FOR DISPOSING OF WATER PLANT SOLIDS INTO A WASTEWATER PLANT

Taking the Waste out of WAS: Sludge Pretreatment for Beneficial Uses

Copies: Mark Hildebrand (NCA) ARCADIS Project No.: April 10, Task A 3100

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

Optimization of Anaerobic Digestion with Bio- Organic Catalyst Compositions (BOCs)

Application of the AGF (Anoxic Gas Flotation) Process

Managing the Risk of Embracing Disruptive Technology

Choices to Address Filamentous Growth

Sustainability and Innovation

Anaerobic Digester Optimization with Bio-Organic Catalyst. NYWEA 81 st Annual Meeting February 3, 2009 One Year Study November 07 - November 08

CHEMICAL FREE PHOSPHOROUS ELIMINSTION P-UPTAKE PROCESS

POTW s As An Emergency Option For Dairy Manure Disposal

Process Monitoring for Biological and Chemical Nutrient Removal

THERMAL HYDROLYSIS AND ENERGY REDUCTION IN BIOSOLIDS PROCESSING

Advances in Nitrogen and Phosphorus Removal at Low DO Conditions

Sustainable Struvite Control Using Residual Gas from Digester Gas Cleaning Process

Wastewater Treatment Plant Facility Plan Update City Project # City of Liberty, Missouri May 6, 2013

Case Study. BiOWiSH Aqua has Positive Long-Term Effects. Biological Help for the Human Race

Activated Sludge Process Control: Nitrification

Technical Memorandum-Low Cost Retrofits for Nitrogen Removal at Wastewater Treatment Plants in the Upper Long Island Sound Watershed

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

COMPARISON OF PROCESS ALTERNATIVES FOR ENHANCED NUTRIENT REMOVAL: PERSPECTIVES ON ENERGY REQUIREMENTS AND COSTS

Advanced Aerobic Digestion. ThermAer. Autothermal Thermophilic Aerobic Digestion. Biosolids Treatment. Thermal Process Systems ThermAer Process

Why THP Made Sense for TRA

Carbon Heat Energy Assessment and. (CHEApet) Tutorials: Carbon Footprint Primer

AMMONIA REMOVAL USING MLE PROCESS EXPERIENCES AT BALLARAT NORTH. David Reyne. Central Highlands Water Authority

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

BIOLOGICAL PHOSPHOROUS REMOVAL AN OPERATOR S GUIDE

Emerging Technologies in Sludge Minimization

PANEL: Making a resource into the right source

Third-Party Technology Verification of the Hydropath Technology at the Robert W. Hite Treatment Facility, Denver, Colorado

Kenosha Wastewater Treatment Plant - Energy Optimized Resource Recovery Project

BIOLOGICAL NUTRIENT REMOVAL PROCESSES

A STRUVITE CONTROL AND PHOSPHORUS REMOVAL PROCESS FOR CENTRATE: FULL-SCALE TESTING. 850 Pembina Highway Winnipeg, MB

MARPAK modular biomedia WASTEWATER TREATMENT

Conceptual Design for a Future Wastewater Treatment Plant

Tour of Regional Water Reclamation Facility

STUMP City of Columbus Solids Treatment and Utilization Master Plan. OWEA Presentation September 27, 2012

SECTION 14.0 BIOLOGICAL NUTRIENT REMOVAL

Dealing with Unexpected Wastewater Treatment Plant Disruptions. February 16, 2017

Aqua MSBR MODIFIED SEQUENCING BATCH REACTOR

Energy Efficiency in Wastewater Treatment

Constructed Wetlands

From residue to raw material

by M k h GROVER Degremont

Use of Biowin for Process Troubleshooting / Design for a Unique Wastewater

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

Energy Optimized Resource Recovery Project Presented By: Curtis Czarnecki, P.E.


GRANULAR ACTIVATED SLUDGE

Sulaibiya world s largest membrane water reuse project

Biogas Cogeneration System Sizing and Payback Based on Weekly Patterns of Anaerobic Digestion and Biosolids Dryer Operation

Lessons Learned from CM-at-Risk and Design Build Projects at Water and Wastewater Treatment Plants. Lawrence H. Hentz Jr., P.E.

Integrated Fixed Film Activated Sludge (IFAS) System for Additional Nitrification at the Coldwater WWTP

Troubleshooting Activated Sludge Processes. PNCWA - Southeast Idaho Operators Section Pocatello, ID February 11, 2016 Jim Goodley, P.E.

Anaerobic Diges;on of Food Waste Project. NEWEA/NYWEA Spring Mee;ng. Brian Paganini Vice President Quantum Biopower, LLC

Tampa Bay Water (TBW) is a regional

Copies: Mark Hildebrand (NCA) ARCADIS Project No.: April 10, Task A 3100

IS DESIGNER RECLAIMED WATER IN NORTH CAROLINA S FUTURE?

Final Report - Low Cost Retrofits for Nitrogen Removal at Wastewater Treatment Plants in the Upper Long Island Sound Watershed

East Coast P Removal Technology Performance Summary

AMMONIA REMOVAL FROM DIGESTED SLUDGE SUPERNATANT

Case History: Anaerobic and Aerobic Treatment of Textile Wastes at South Carolina Textile Plants. Introduction

Little Patuxent WRP 8 th Addition - Biosolids Processing Facilities Improvements

MIXED LIQUOR FERMENTATION FOR CARBON AUGMENTATION BREAKING FREE FROM AN UNFAVORABLE INFLUENT CARBON BALANCE

21 st Century Biofilm Reactors TREATING FOR TROUT. Northport/Leelanau Township Wastewater Treatment Facility. Presented by: Rich Grant, PE

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

Coupling Trickling Filter or RBC s with Activated Sludge

Circular economy in the region of Amsterdam. Edwin de Buijzer KWR Watercycle Research Institute. 3 November 2015

Sludge Co-Thickening and Biogas Cogeneration in the Electric City

NUTRIENT REMOVAL FROM ANAEROBIC DIGESTER SIDE-STREAM AT THE BLUE PLAINS AWTP Overlook Ave., SW, Washington, DC 20032

Evaluation of Conventional Activated Sludge Compared to Membrane Bioreactors

Municipal Wastewater Engineering

PEIRCE ISLAND WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY UPGRADE

Getting to Zero: Sustainability Best Practices at POTWs. Presentation Outline 5/2/2013

Startup of Virginia's Newest Organics Co-Digestion Facility. Dennis Clough, Energy Systems Group George Bevington, Gerhardt, LLC

NPDES COMPLIANCE OF COOLING TOWERS BLOWDOWN AT POWER PLANTS WITH RECLAIMED WATER AS SOURCE WATER

Innovative Use of Dissolved Air Flotation with Biosorption as Primary Treatment to Approach Energy Neutrality in WWTPs

CITY OF FORT MYERS CENTRAL ADVANCED WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY

2/22/2011. Presentation Outline. Overview of Wastewater Aeration. Basic Equation. Some Acronyms. dc dt. dc dt TDS BP T C L

WEFTEC.06. Regarding concept appropriateness, one must consider a number of factors as listed below.

Ellis Creek Water Recycling Facility, City of Petaluma

ASA Analytics ChemScan Process Analyzers Reprint ASA Publication #194

WEFTEC.06. **Cobb County Water System, Marietta, Georgia

CUSTOM-DESIGNED WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANTS

Resource recovery from sludge treatment at Waterboard De Dommel (Netherlands) Jan-Evert van Veldhoven

Is Oxygen Injection the Solution for Your Collection System Odors and Corrosion?

Transcription:

Defining the Benefits of Harvesting Phosphorus from Dewatering Filtrate Cameron Clark, PE CDM Smith August 1, 2013

Agenda Des Moines WRA Background Plant Nutrient Balance Nutrient Issues P Removal Technology Comparison Life Cycle Cost Summary

Des Moines WRF - Existing Program ~44 MGD Primary and Secondary Treatment Biogas Storage Process Heating Sludges Building Heating Hauled Wastes Anaerobic Digestion Power Generation Industrial User 0.14 MGD > 30 loads/day Biosolids to Land Application

Des Moines WRF - Existing Program Hauled-In Waste ~45% of the VS Loading Highly profitable

Influent 72 MGD 5,200 ppd (8.6 mg/l) Plant Phosphorus Balance Liquid Treatment Process Primary Secondary Effluent 3,400 ppd (5.6 mg/l) Sidestream 3,600 ppd Percent of influent: 69% Typical: 20-30% Solids Treatment Process Blended Sludge 5,600 ppd Biosolids 2,900 ppd Based on 2040 Design Condition Aeration SRT = 37 days at 52 deg F Special Waste - modeled 1,100 ppd (1.9 mg/l eq.)

Struvite Issues ~$170,000/yr in Maintenance Struvite Buildup on 10-in Digested Solids Lines

Influent 5,200 ppd (8.6 mg/l) Expected Effluent Nutrient Limits Liquid Treatment Process Primary Secondary Effluent 1 mg/l P Solids Treatment Process Special Waste 1,100 ppd (1.9 mg/l eq.)

Biosolids Regulations Currently land apply biosolids based on nitrogen content 10 dry tons/ac/yr Severe reduction if P limitation is imposed 3 dry tons/ac/yr At $15/wet ton for land application, costs would be expected to increase 65% P-based rates N-based rates 0 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 Present Worth Cost (1,000 $) Total Present Worth (PW) PW of O&M PW of Capital and Salvage Value

Influent 5,200 ppd (8.6 mg/l) Proposed Solution Sidestream Nutrient Recovery Liquid Treatment Process Primary Secondary Effluent 1 mg/l P Sidestream Treatment Struvite Solids Treatment Process Biosolids 2,500 ppd P Special Waste 1,100 ppd (1.9 mg/l eq.)

Proposed Solution Sidestream Nutrient Removal Water Environment Association of WEAT Texas Biosolids/Odor & & Corrosion Conference Digestion Pretreatment: Critical Defining Issues the in Benefits Thermal of Hydrolysis Harvesting System Phosphorus Design from Dewatering Filtrate

Paques PHOSPAQ

PHOSPAQ Struvite Product SOURCE: YouTube

Ostara Pearl Process

Crystal Green Fertilizer

Struvite Recovery Model - Baseline 72 MGD influent Aeration SRT = 37 days at 52 deg F 80% removal of sidestream ortho-p

Influent 5,200 ppd (8.6 mg/l) Struvite Recovery Model Baseline P Balance With Struvite Harvesting Only Sidestream Without: 3,600 ppd With: 700 ppd 81% reduction Liquid Treatment Process Primary Secondary Blended Sludge Without: 5,600 ppd With: 5,200 ppd Effluent Without: 3,400 ppd (5.6 mg/l) With: 800 ppd (1.4 mg/l) 76% reduction Struvite Without: 0 ppd With: 2,700 ppd Filtrate Without: 3,600 ppd With: 3,400 ppd Solids Treatment Process Special Waste 1,100 ppd (1.9 mg/l eq.) Biosolids Without: 2,900 ppd With: 2,700 ppd About the same

Struvite Recovery Model AO System 72 MGD influent Carbon Addition to AB1 for Bio-P removal Aeration SRT = 10 days at 52 deg F 80% removal of sidestream ortho-p

Influent 5,200 ppd (8.6 mg/l) Struvite Recovery Model AO System P Balance With and Without Struvite Harvesting Sidestream Without: 3,600 ppd With: 700 ppd 81% reduction Liquid Treatment Process Primary Secondary Blended Sludge Without: 5,600 ppd With: 5,400 ppd Effluent Without: 3,400 ppd (5.6 mg/l) With: 600 ppd (1.0 mg/l) 82% reduction Struvite Without: 0 ppd With: 2,800 ppd Filtrate Without: 3,600 ppd With: 3,500 ppd Solids Treatment Process Special Waste 1,100 ppd (1.9 mg/l eq.) Biosolids Without: 2,900 ppd With: 2,900 ppd About the same

Struvite Recovery Model A2O System 72 MGD influent Carbon Addition to AB1 and AB2 for Bio-P and Denitrification Aeration SRT = 10 days at 52 deg F 80% removal of sidestream ortho-p

Struvite Recovery Model A2O System P Balance With and Without Struvite Harvesting Influent 5,200 ppd (8.6 mg/l) Sidestream Without: 3,600 ppd With: 500 ppd 86% reduction Liquid Treatment Process Primary Secondary Blended Sludge Without: 5,600 ppd With: 5,300 ppd Effluent Without: 3,400 ppd (5.6 mg/l) With: 600 ppd (1.0 mg/l) 82% reduction Struvite Without: 0 ppd With: 2,800 ppd Filtrate Without: 3,600 ppd With: 3,300 ppd Solids Treatment Process Special Waste 1,100 ppd (1.9 mg/l eq.) Biosolids Without: 2,900 ppd With: 2,900 ppd About the same

Struvite Recovery Model A2O System Only 72 MGD influent Carbon Addition to AB1 and AB2 for Bio-P and Denitrification Aeration SRT = 10 days at 52 deg F 80% removal of sidestream ortho-p

Influent 5,200 ppd (8.6 mg/l) Struvite Recovery Model No Struvite Harvesting P Balance With and Without A2O System Sidestream Without: 3,600 ppd With: 6,800 ppd 189% increase Liquid Treatment Process Primary Secondary Solids Treatment Process Blended Sludge Without: 5,600 ppd With: 11,500 ppd Special Waste 1,100 ppd (1.9 mg/l eq.) Effluent Without: 3,400 ppd (5.6 mg/l) With: 1,000 ppd (1.6 mg/l) 67% reduction Biosolids Without: 2,900 ppd With: 5,300 ppd 183% increase

Life Cycle Cost Assessment Continue Existing Program with Future BNR Treatment Parameter First 7 years Final 13 years Capital Costs ($) BNR treatment for P removal 68,000,000 BNR treatment for N removal 68,000,000 Total ($) $ 136,000,000 O&M Costs ($/yr) Pipe cleaning 84,000 84,000 Fe costs 120,000 120,000 Other cleaning chemicals (Guard, Rydlyme, or other) 64,000 64,000 Aeration for nitrification 64,000 BNR for P removal 2,497,000 BNR for N removal 1,684,000 Total ($/yr) $ 352,000/yr $ 4,597,000/yr Equivalent Annual O&M for 20 year period, ($/yr) $2,542,000

Cost Estimates Implement Struvite Recovery with Future BNR Treatment Parameter First 7 years Final 13 years Capital Costs ($) WASSTRIP Pipe modifications 316,000 Basin improvements 203,000 Pump station 293,000 Ostara System Equipment 7,222,000 Equipment installation 1,569,000 Filtrate handling modifications 384,000 Building, sitework, and misc. structural improvements 1,504,000 Electrical and instrumentation/controls 1,910,000 BNR treatment for P removal 36,000,000 BNR treatment for N removal 56,000,000 Total ($) $14,365,000 $92,000,000 O&M Costs ($/yr) First 7 years Final 13 years Struvite product revenue (1,079,000) (1,079,000) Struvite operating costs 1,079,000 1,079,000 Pipe cleaning 42,000 42,000 Fe costs 30,000 30,000 Other cleaning chemicals (Guard, Rydlyme, or other) 16,000 16,000 Aeration for nitrification 0 BNR for P removal 1,314,000 BNR for N removal 1,380,000 Total ($/yr) $88,000/yr $2,782,000/yr Equivalent Annual O&M for 20 year period, ($/yr) $1,531,000/yr

Parameter Alternative 1 Continue Current Program Alternative 2- Develop Struvite Recovery Systems Initial capital costs 0 14,365,000 Present worth of future capital costs 96,891,000 65,190,000 Present worth of annual O&M, $ 31,679,000 19,081,000 Present worth of remaining value of facilities and equipment, $ (23,294,000) (15,738,000) Total Present Worth, $ 105,000,000 83,000,000

Summary Performed nutrient balance on Des Moines WRA Compared two struvite recovery technologies spanning perceived range from simple to more complicated Ostara chosen based primarily on operational history Evaluated BioWin models with struvite harvesting, traditional biological nutrient removal, and both Estimated costs of both nutrient treatment approaches

Conclusions High amounts of P introduced in hauled waste Sidestreams are important when modeling wastewater facilities Struvite recovery significantly reduces size and cost of equivalent biological nutrient removal systems May not achieve limits with traditional BNR and existing tankage Struvite recovery may have minimal impact on biosolids P concentration Additional approaches, such as WASSTRIP, may be needed to protect digester and piping Major cost savings not from sale of struvite product, but from BNR size reduction and reduced pipe cleaning

QUESTIONS