jacqueline german cbe 555 march 9, 2015. water is essential for life with one of the most important...
TRANSCRIPT
An Analytical Comparison between Secondary Wastewater Treatment Methods; Constructed
Wetlands (CW), Modified Ludzack-Ettinger (MLE), and Sequencing Batch Reactors (SBR)
Jacqueline GermanCBE 555
March 9, 2015
An Analytical Comparison between Secondary Wastewater Treatment Methods; Constructed
Wetlands (CW), Modified Ludzack-Ettinger (MLE), and Sequencing Batch Reactors (SBR)
Water is essential for life with one of the most important sectors relating to
water that helps sustain life on earth being wastewater treatment
Overview
1. Background of Secondary Wastewater Treatment
2. Constructed Wetlands (CW)3. Modified Ludzack-Ettinger (MLE)4. Sequencing Batch Reactors (SBRs)5. Evaluation Matrix on basis of cost, and
phosphorus removal efficiency for a 100,000 gallon/day plant
6. Research on SBR systems7. Conclusion
Animations and youtube videos of the wastewater treatment process
http://www.gbra.org/wastewater-treatment.swf
Focus on nitrogen removal due to the severity of ammonia toxicity to fish from even extremely small
levels
Phosphorus removal is important due to its characteristics of being a good fertilizer ingredient
(e.g. for algae)
Phosphorus Accumulating
Organisms (PAOs) are
obligate aerobes. They can store food, but not process
it.
Average Inflow Values (Secondary Treatment System) COD500 mg/L NH3-N25 mg/L TN45 mg/L PO4-P 10 (9.88 mg/L)
Constructed Wetlands (CW) generally contain five principal concepts:
(1) substrates with various rates of hydraulic conductivity,
(2) plants adapted to water-saturated anaerobic substrates,
(3) a water column,
(4) (in)vertebrates, and
(5) aerobic and anaerobic microbial populations, assisting in this (Hammer, 1989)
From Brix (1993) From Shutes (2001)
“These systems efficiencies have been documented to reach 77% for ammonia nitrogen and 82% for total phosphorus (yearly mean),” (15)
98% reduction of BOD and 90-98% suspended solids, averages of 60-90% nutrient removal
Cost analysis concluded that constructed wetlands cost start around 51,700 US$
(Oppelt, 2000)
10 mgP/L*0.18=1.8 mgP/L
The MLE process involves a series of tanks
Anoxic Stage NO3-NO2(Nitrate-Nitrite) N2+H2OAeration Stage NH4 (Ammonia)+O2 NO3-NO2
(Nitrate-Nitrite)
From Song et al. (2003)
“Application of sludge ozonation to the [MLE with] MBR system was significantly effective for the minimization of excess sludge production as well as for the enhancement of nutrient removal,” (359).
Cost analysis concluded that the MLE method had a total cost around 1,069,400 US$ (Hartman and Cleland, 2007)
10 mgP/L*0.46=4.6 mgP/L
Sequencing batch reactors operate with many of the process that the MLE tanks due in series in one tank
Benefits include
Decreased variation in construction
Decreased variation in operation
Decreased space necessary
Wilderer et al. (2001)
This method can more easily tolerate hydraulic or organic “shock” loads with its flexible aeration design (Mikkelson, 1995) overall aeration efficiency enhanced to 30%
Sequencing batch reactors are documented to have a total cost around 1,066,000 US$ (Hartman and
Cleland, 2007)
Mikkelson (1995)
“Based upon 1986 EPA cost comparison of a 1.0 MGD facility, the installation of an SBR represented 10% cost savings as compared to a flow-through [e.g MLE] system,” (38)
10 mgP/L*0.15=1.5 mgP/L
Background on Research
Has been running for around 4 years
Two Liter system
Five phased systems
Aeration levels around 0.2 mg/L during aerobic phase
Average Inflow Values (Secondary Treatment System) COD500 mg/L NH3-N25 mg/L TN45 mg/L PO4-P 10 (9.88 mg/L)
Bibliography/Graphics
Slide 2: http://www.constructionweekonline.com/article-19901-dubai-to-crack-down-on-industrial-wastewater/, http://water.usgs.gov/edu/watercyclefreshstorage.html
Slide 4: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/54/ESQUEMPEQUE-EN.jpg
Slide 5: http://www.gbra.org/wastewater-treatment.swf
Slide 6: http://www.hach-lange.ma/countrysites/action_q/download%3Bdocument/DOK_ID/14786173/type/pdf/lkz/MA/spkz/fr/TOKEN/ZnetjKCx8xj3bU3qN6jNAaemUMk/M/LY2QgA
Slide 7: http://www.faqs.org/patents/imgfull/20120187042_02
Slide 8:http://articles.bplans.com/should-i-consider-factoring-to-smooth-out-my-cash-flow/
Slide 10: Brix, H. (1993). Wastewater treatment in constructed wetlands: system design, removal processes, and treatment performance. Constructed wetlands for water quality improvement, 10.
Slide 11: http://environmentalconsultingohio.wordpress.com
Slide 14: Vidal, N., Poch, M., Martí, E., & Rodríguez‐Roda, I. (2002). Evaluation of the environmental implications to include structural changes in a wastewater treatment plant. Journal of Chemical Technology and Biotechnology, 77(11), 1207
Slide 15: http://lib.znate.ru/docs/index-35825.html?page=13, http://www.waterdesignbuild.com/water-design-build-projects/robindale-wwtp-renovation-expansion/
Slide 18: Wilderer, P. A., Irvine, R. L., & Goronszy, M. C. (2001). Sequencing batch reactor technology. Intelligence Water Association (IWA) Alliance House, London, UK, 29
Slide 19: 20, Wilderer et al., 2001
Bibliography/Graphics
Slide 25: http://www.hazenandsawyer.com/work/services/energy-audits-and-efficiency/,
http://www.aaees.org/e3competition-winners-2013gp-research.php
Slide 2: http://www.erc.uic.edu/energy-efficiency/illinois-energy-now-programs/waste-water-treatment-facilities-program
Slide 26: http://articles.bplans.com/should-i-consider-factoring-to-smooth-out-my-cash-flow/
Hammer, D. A. (Ed.). (1989). Constructed wetlands for wastewater treatment: municipal, industrial and agricultural. CRC Press.
Hartman, P. and Cleland, J. (2007). Wastewater Treatment Performance and Cost Data to Support an Affordability Analysis for Water Quality Standards. Prepared by ICF international for Montana Department of Environmental Quality.
Oppelt, T. (2000). Constructed Wetlands Treatment of Municipal Wastewaters Enivonmental Protection Agency (EPA) Manual. Cincinnati, Ohio
Slide 34: http://www.erc.uic.edu/energy-efficiency/illinois-energy-now-programs/waste-water-treatment-facilities-program