Generating Trading Credits Through Application of Large-Scale Algal Turf Scrubber®Pollutant Recovery System

HydroMentia, Inc.May 12, 2005

Phosphorus and Nitrogen Treatment Alternatives

Best Management Practices

Chemical Treatment

Managed Aquatic Plant Systems

Treatment Wetlands

Vision

“The past is a guidepost, not a hitching post.”

Thomas Holcroft

Lake Okeechobee BMP Performance•In 1987, the PLRG developed for Lake Okeechobee mandated a 40% reduction in total phosphorus loads to Lake Okeechobee from 531 Mtons to 360 Mtons. The PLRG was to be achieved by 1992.

•Following nearly $160 million in direct costs and lost income resulting from BMPs and other programs, the programs implemented failed to meet the 1992 360 Mton SWIM PLRG objective

Table 1: Total P Loads (in Mtons) to Lake Okeechobee 1991-20031

Year Measured Load a Long-term Load

(5-yr moving average) a

Long-term Over-target Load (5-yr moving

average) ab

1991 445 415 275 1992 388 393 253 1993 296 375 235 1994 580 421 281 1995 683 478 338 1996 200 430 290 1997 470 446 306 1998 780 543 403 1999 670 561 421 2000c 169 458 318 2001 607 539 399 2002 543 554 414 2003 187d - -

A IIncludes an atmospheric load of 35 Mtons per year based on the Lake Okeechobee TMDL (FDEP 2001) bTarget is the Lake Okeechobee TMDL of 140 Mtons (FDEP 2001) compared to a five-year moving average c. Period of record for baseline load estimate in LOPP is 1991-2000 (see page 11) dYear 2003 data reported is through June 2003 and includes half of the annual atmospheric load. The QA/QC process for the data for the complete year will not be completed until March 2004

Vision to Optimize Effectiveness

Regional Treatment Systems

Direct Recovery of Nutrients

Phosphorus and Nitrogen Treatment Alternatives

Best Management Practices

Chemical Treatment

Managed Aquatic Plant Systems

Treatment Wetlands

Phosphorus and Nitrogen Treatment Alternatives

Lake Okeechobee Watershed Project Delivery Team (PDT)

Screening and Ranking of 105 Phosphorus Control Technologies:

•Treatment Wetlands

•Managed Aquatic Plant Systems•Algal Turf Scrubber®

•Water Hyacinth Scrubber

•Chemical Treatment

COMMERCIAL EXPERIENCE:

Managed Aquatic Plant System (MAPS)

Over 30 years of full scale operational experience

Individual Facility Capacities over 30 mgd

Facilities in Florida, Alabama, Texas, California

HISTORY

Proven Performance

A MAPS unit, composed of a Water Hyacinth Scrubber (WHSTM) for 5 MGD advanced treatment of domestic wastewater in the late 1980’s—City of Orlando Iron Bridge Regional WWTP

A MAPS unit, composed of a Water Hyacinth Scrubber (WHSTM) and an Algal Turf Scrubber (ATSTM) provided treatment of 30 MGD of recycled water within this large scale fish aquaculture facility in Florida

A 1.0 MGD ATSTM-WHSTM prototype MAPS system operated in the Lake Okeechobee Watershed (LOW) to investigate reducing phosphorus loads as required by the recently imposed TMDL. Jointly funded by the South Florida Water Management District, the Florida Department of Environmental Protection and the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services

2-Stage Managed Aquatic Plant System (MAPS)Water Hyacinth Scrubber (WHS™)

Algal Turf Scrubber® (ATS™)

Algal Turf Scrubber® (ATS™)

ATS™ Influent Flume and Surgers

ATS™ Effluent Flume

ATS™ Pump Station

Algal Turf Scrubber (ATSTM) (2.0% and 1.5% Slope)

Okeechobee Compost Market Capacity

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

300,000

350,000

400,000

Com

post

(ton

s)

Okeechobee Region - 2004Estimated Potential Usage

377,500

Okeechobee Region - 2004 ActualUsage

84,395

25 MGD Typical ATS™ TreatmentFacility - Compost Production

561

1

Shiralipour A. and E. Epstein. 2005. Preliminary Compost Market Assessment, Okeechobee, Florida Region. University of Florida, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences

MAPS Water Treatment SystemsProven & Quantifiable Performance

Phosphorus Control

Algal Turf Scrubber® (ATS™) and Water Hyacinth Scrubber (WHS™) Relationship of Phosphorus Mass Loading and Areal Removal Rates

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

1.0 10.0 100.0 1000.0

P Mass Loading Rate (g m-2 yr-1)

P A

real

Rem

oval

Rat

e (g

m-2

yr-1

)

0

400

800

1,200

1,600

2,000

2,400

2,800

3,200

3,600

4,000

4,400

P A

real

Rem

oval

Rat

e (lb

s ac

re-1

yr-1 )

Melbourne (WHS) - Ci = 2-6 mg/l

Lakeland (WHS) - Ci = 2-6 mg/l

Kissimmee (WHS) - Ci < 2 mg/l

Loxahatchee (WHS) - Ci < 2 mg/l

Iron Bridge (WHS) - Ci < 2 mg/l

S154 (WHS) - Ci < 2 mg/l

S154 (ATS, WHS Pretreatment) - Ci < 250 ppb

Patterson (ATS) - Ci = 2-6 mg/l

EAA-Everglades (ATS) - Ci < 150 ppb

S-154 ATS Single Stage - Ci < 500 ppb

MAPS Water Treatment SystemsProven & Quantifiable Performance

Nitrogen Control

Algal Turf Scrubber® (ATS™) and Water Hyacinth Scrubber (WHS™)Relationship of Mass Loading and Removal Rates for Nitrogen

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

1 10 100 1,000 10,000

N Mass Loading Rate(g m-2 yr-1)

N A

real

Rem

oval

Rat

e (g

m-2

yr-1

)

0

4,000

8,000

12,000

16,000

20,000

24,000

N A

real

Rem

oval

Rat

e (lb

s ac

re-1

yr-1

)

Iron Bridge (WHS) - Ci = 2-15 mg/l

S154 (WHS) - Ci < 2 mg/l

Lakeland (WHS) - Ci = 6-27 mg/l

Melbourne (WHS) - Ci = 32.7 mg/l (avg)

Loxatachee (WHS) - Ci = 4.9 mg/l (avg)

Kissimmee (WHS) - Ci = 11.1 mg/l (avg)

NTC McCoy (WHS) - Ci = 4.3 mg/l (avg)

S154 Single Stage (ATS) - Ci = 1.1-2.8 mg/l

ATS™ Pollutant Recovery Benefits

• Lowest Cost Treatment

• Reduced Land Requirements

• Quantifiable Performance

Lowest Cost Treatment

Region S-191 Basin

Fisheating Creek

Istokpoga Basin

LOW – ATS™

Flow (AF/yr) 102,000 197,000 97,500 28,000

Inflow TP (ppb)

518 329 261 150

Outflow TP (ppb) 100 100 100 109

Management Measures

P Removal Cost ($/lb) Storage Reservoirs 1 $189 $195 $234 EMA-STA 1 $38 $53 $62 Single Stage ATS™ 2 $25

[1] USACE, SFWMD, HDR. October 2003. Lake Okeechobee Watershed Project Draft PIR, Water Quality Treatment Ranking[2] HydroMentia. March 2005. Single Stage ATS™ Present Worth Costs

Reduced Land Requirements

448

224

9 4 3

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

Acr

es

Treatm

ent W

etlan

d (1.0

g m-2

yr-1)

Treatm

ent W

etlan

d (2.0

g m-2

yr-1)

Phosphorus Treatment Facility Land Requirements(2 Metric Ton Per Year Treatment Capacity)

ATS™ and Treatment Wetland (STA) Water Treatment Costs

University of Florida - IFAS

Sano, D., A.W. Hodges and R. L. Degner. 2005. Economic Analysis of Water Treatment for Phosphorus Removal in Florida: Comparison of Wetland Stormwater Treatment Areas and Managed Aquatic Plant Systems.

MAPS phosphorus treatment costs ($/kg P-removed) for proposed treatment systems in the Lake Okeechobee Watershed were 53 –69% lower than costs for wetland stormwater treatment areas.

Costs included capital, operations and management, water storageand recreational benefits.

Vision to Optimize Effectiveness

Regional Treatment Systems

Direct Recovery of Nutrients

Regional Treatment Systems

Williamsburg, VA

• The city constructs regional stormwater management facilities that generate phosphorus credits by reducing loads beyond existing conditions.

• Developers have the the option of meeting their phosphorus removal requirements through the purchase of phosphorus credits from a regional stormwater management facility

• The number of estimated pounds of phosphorus removed by a facility is the number of credits it generates.

• All of the credits are sold and cover the construction, operation, and maintenance costs of the regional control structure.

• Regional system creates a balance between point- and nonpoint-source projects.

Direct Recovery of Nutrient Pollutants

Influent Canal

Perimeter Fence Influent Headwall

Sump

Axial Flow Pumps

ATS™ Influent Flume

ATS™ Headwall

ATS™ Surgers (18)

ATS™ FLOWAY

ATS™ Effluent Flume

Lake Lawne

Intake Manifold

Compost Area

Discharge Line

Terminal Box and Flex Rake

Access Gate

Direct Pollutant Recovery and Lake Restoration System as a Cost Effective

Option to Meet TMDL Regulations

I. Eliminate ancillary water storage costs

II. Reduced nutrient recovery costs

III. Recover historical pollutant loads

IV. Pollutant trading options

V. Performance quantifiable

I. Eliminate Ancillary Water Storage Costs

• Need for new watershed storage infrastructure eliminated

• Eliminated water storage costs can be applied to reduce in-lake pollutants beyond TMDL requirements

II. Reduced Nutrient Recovery Costs

• Ancillary water storage system costs eliminated

• Pollutant treatment costs lower for systems designed to operate under relatively stable conditions – eliminates peak hydraulic loads associated with storm events

• Consistent flows allow smaller facilities (lower costs) to provide equivalent pollutant reduction

III. Recover Historical Pollutant Loads

• Eliminated water storage costs to be applied to reduce in-lake pollutants beyond TMDL requirements

• Net reduction of in-lake pollutants to improve lake water quality, reducing internally generated pollutant loads (phytoplankton sediment load)

• Accrued reduction of in-lake pollutants will eliminating short term impacts of seasonal pollutant loads

• Faster restoration of impaired surface water

IV. Pollutant Trading Options

• Pollutants recovered by centralized facility

• Fees to be charged to individual sources required to reduced pollutant loads (point source and nonpoint source)

• Standardized formal agreements and pollutant treatment costs for watershed sources

• Eliminates uncertainty associated with nonpoint source management

V. Performance Quantifiable

• Pollutants recovered by centralized facility easily quantified

• Regulatory monitoring costs reduced

Opportunity

“In the middle of every difficulty lies opportunity.”

Albert Einstein

Discussion

Algal Turf Scrubber® (ATS™)Relationship of Phosphorus Mass Loading and Outflow Concentration

0.01

0.10

1.00

10.00

1.0 10.0 100.0 1000.0

P Mass Loading Rate (g m-2 yr-1)

TP O

ut (m

g l-1

)

S154 Basin (WHS Pretreatment, ATS-300', Ci=330-50 ppb)

EAA-Everglades (ATS-50', Ci=70-30 ppb)

S154 Single Stage (ATS-300', HLR=100 cm/d, Ci=300-80 ppb)

S154 Single Stage (ATS-300', HLR=200 cm/d, Ci=300-80 ppb)

S154 Single Stage (ATS-300', HLR=450cm/d, Ci=300-80 ppb)

Phosphorus Balance

35.15%

11.19%3.01%

6.69%

0.00%

2.40%

26.72%

0.71%

14.14%

Hyacinth HarvestGain in hyacinth standing cropAlgae Harvest RakeAlgae Harvest microscreenGain in algae standing cropEcological losses SedimentationLoss in water columnEffluent Discharge

Nearly all of the nutrient pollutants removed within a MAPS are accounted for within the harvested biomass (65-85%) or sloughed biomass (15-35%), which is manifested as organic sediment. As with treatment wetlands, a sediment management plan is required for long term operations. The phosphorus balance for the S-154 Prototype in Okeechobee is shown here.

Calculated vs. Actual Accretion Rates for Treatment Wetlands and Natural Systems

0

2

4

6

8

10

0 2 4 6 8 10 12Field M easured Sediment Accrual Rate cm/yr

Equa

tion

3 C

alcu

late

d Se

dim

ent A

ccr

Rat

e cm

/yr

12

ual

Historical Everglades OEW NTC-1aNTC 15 STC-4 STC-9Cell 4 Equal Value Line PSTA Test CellsPSTA Field Cell 1 PSTA Field Cell 3 PSTA Field Cell 4

L-62 CanalInfluent Pumping Station

Influent Monitoring Station

Water Hyacinth Scrubbers (WHSTM)

Harvesting and Processing Area (Composting and Storage Pad)

ATS™ Pump Station

ATS™ Influent Flume and Surgers

Algal Turf Scrubber (ATSTM) (2.0% and 1.5% Slope)

ATS™ Effluent Flume

Water Storage/Borrow Area

Effluent Monitoring Station

Proven Livestock FeedFeed Trials performed by Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services,

University of Florida College of Veterinary Medicine, McArthur Inc. Dairies

0

5,000,000

10,000,000

15,000,000

20,000,000

25,000,000

30,000,000

35,000,000

40,000,000

45,000,000

50,000,000

Ann

ual D

ry F

eed

Con

sum

ed (t

ons)

Dairy Cattle Feed Consumption - United State

United States 49,000,000

Florida 832,000

Okeechobee & Highlands Counties 214,000

100 Ton Phosphorus ATS - WHSTreatment Facility - FeedProduction

20,000

1

Livestock Feed Market Capacity – United StatesDairy Cattle Feed Consumption Only

Phosphorus Removal Performance

Phosphorus Areal Removal RatesTreatment Wetlands and Managed Aquatic Plant Systems (MAPS)

6.0 12.9

10.2

2.6 7.5 4.9 49.1

113.8

122.7

253.4

427.4

926.1

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1,000

Orland

o Eas

terly

Wetl

and (

1992

-1997

)

Cell-4

(SAV) (

Jun 9

6 - O

ct 00

)

Evergl

ades

STAs (

WY20

02)

Boney

Mars

h (Ja

n 82 -

Jan 8

6)

ENRP (Aug

95 - M

ar 99

)

WCA-2A

(Jan

92 - N

ov 99

)

S-154 E

MA-STA\S

AV-STA M

esoc

osm (M

ar 03

- Oct

03)

P R

emov

al R

ate

(lbs/

acre

/yr)

TPIN = 480 ppbTPOUT = 169 ppb

TPIN = 139 ppbTPOUT = 76 ppb

TPIN = 189 ppbTPOUT = 54 ppb

Algal Turf Scrubber® (ATS™) and Water Hyacinth Scrubber (WHS™)Relationship of Phosphorus Mass Loading and Percent Removal

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

1.0 10.0 100.0 1000.0

P Mass Loading Rate (g m-2 yr-1)

Perc

ent R

emov

al (%

)

Melbourne (WHS) - Ci = 2-6 mg/lLakeland (WHS) - Ci = 2-6 mg/lKissimmee (WHS) - Ci < 2 mg/lLoxahatchee (WHS) - Ci < 2 mg/lIron Bridge (WHS) - Ci < 2 mg/lS154 2-Stage WHS-ATS - Ci < 750 ppbPatterson (ATS-500') - Ci = 2000-6000 ppbS154 Single Stage (ATS-300', HLR=100 cm/d, Ci=426-70 ppb)S154 Single Stage (ATS-300', HLR=200 cm/d, Ci=426-70 ppb)S154 Single Stage (ATS-300', HLR=450 cm/d, Ci=426-70 ppb)

Algal Turf Scrubber® (ATS™) and Water Hyacinth Scrubber (WHS™) Relationship of Phosphorus Mass Loading and Outflow Concentration

0.01

0.10

1.00

10.00

1.0 10.0 100.0 1000.0

P Mass Loading Rate (g m-2 yr-1)

TP O

ut (m

g l-1

)

Melbourne (WHS) - Ci = 2-6 mg/l Lakeland (WHS) - Ci = 2-6 mg/l

Kissimmee (WHS) - Ci < 2 mg/l Loxahatchee (WHS) - Ci < 2 mg/l

Iron Bridge (WHS) - Ci < 2 mg/l Patterson (ATS) - Ci = 2-6 mg/l

S154 2-Stage WHS-ATS - Ci < 750 ppb S154 Single Stage (ATS-300', HLR=100 cm/d, Ci=426-70 ppb)

S154 Single Stage (ATS-300'), HLR=200 cm/d, Ci=426-70 ppb) S154 Single Stage (ATS-300', HLR=450 cm/d, Ci=426-70 ppb)

EAA-Everglades (ATS-50', Ci=70-30 ppb)

Algal Turf Scrubber® (ATS™) and Water Hyacinth Scrubber (WHS™)Relationship of Mass Loading and Removal Rates for Nitrogen

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

1 10 100 1,000 10,000

N Mass Loading Rate(g m-2 yr-1)

N A

real

Rem

oval

Rat

e (g

m-2

yr-1

)

0

4,000

8,000

12,000

16,000

20,000

24,000

N A

real

Rem

oval

Rat

e (lb

s ac

re-1

yr-1

)

Iron Bridge (WHS) - Ci = 2-15 mg/l

S154 (WHS) - Ci < 2 mg/l

Lakeland (WHS) - Ci = 6-27 mg/l

Melbourne (WHS) - Ci = 32.7 mg/l (avg)

Loxatachee (WHS) - Ci = 4.9 mg/l (avg)

Kissimmee (WHS) - Ci = 11.1 mg/l (avg)

NTC McCoy (WHS) - Ci = 4.3 mg/l (avg)

S154 Single Stage (ATS) - Ci = 1.1-2.8 mg/l

Algal Turf Scrubber® (ATS™) and Water Hyacinth Scrubber (WHS™)Relationship of Mass Loading and Percent Removal for Nitrogen

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

1 10 100 1,000 10,000

N Mass Loading Rate(g m-2 yr-1)

N P

erce

nt R

emov

al (%

)

Iron Bridge (WHS) - Ci = 2-15 mg/l

S154 (WHS) - Ci < 2 mg/l

Lakeland (WHS) - Ci = 6-27 mg/l

Melbourne (WHS) - Ci = 32.7 mg/l (avg)

Loxatachee (WHS) - Ci = 4.9 mg/l (avg)

Kissimmee (WHS) - Ci = 11.1 mg/l (avg)

NTC McCoy (WHS) - Ci = 4.3 mg/l (avg)

S154 Single Stage (ATS) - Ci = 1.1-2.8 mg/l

Algal Turf Scrubber® (ATS™)Relationship of Phosphorus Mass Loading and Areal Removal Rates

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

1.0 10.0 100.0 1000.0

P Mass Loading Rate (g m-2 yr-1)

P A

real

Rem

oval

Rat

e (g

m-2

yr-1

)

0

400

800

1,200

1,600

2,000

2,400

2,800

3,200

3,600

4,000

4,400

P A

real

Rem

oval

Rat

e (lb

s ac

re-1

yr-1

)

Patterson (ATS - 500', Ci = 2000-6000 ppb)

S154 Second Stage (WHS Pretreatment, ATS-300', Ci=330-50 ppb)

S154 Single Stage (ATS-300', HLR=100 cm/d, Ci=426-70 ppb)

S154 Single Stage (ATS-300', HLR=200 cm/d, Ci=426-70 ppb)

EAA-Everglades (ATS-50', Ci=80-30 ppb)

S154 Single Stage (ATS-300', HLR=450 cm/d, Ci=426-70 ppb)

ATS™ Influent Flume & Surgers

ATS™ Floway & Algal Turf

ATS™ Effluent Flume

ATS™ Effluent Flume

ATS™ Biomass Recovery

Water Hyacinth Scrubber (WHS™)

Water Hyacinth Scrubber (WHS™)

Water Hyacinth Model 101-G Grapple

Water Hyacinth Biomass Recovery

Model 401-P Processor

Algal Turf Scrubber® (ATS™)Relationship of Phosphorus Mass Loading and Percent Removal

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

1.0 10.0 100.0 1000.0

P Loading Rate (g m-2 yr-1)

Perc

ent R

emov

al (%

)

Patterson (ATS-500') - Ci = 2000-6000 ppbS154 Single Stage (ATS-300', HLR=100 cm/d, Ci=426-70 ppb)S154 Single Stage (ATS-300', HLR=200 cm/d, Ci=426-70 ppb)S154 Single Stage (ATS-300', HLR=450 cm/d, Ci=426-70 ppb)

Algal Turf Scrubber® (ATS™)Relationship of Mass Loading and Percent Removal for Nitrogen

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

1 10 100 1,000 10,000

N Mass Loading Rate(g m-2 yr-1)

N P

erce

nt R

emov

al (%

) S154 Single Stage (ATS-300, HLR=100 cm/d, Ci = 1.1 - 2.8 mg/l)

S154 Single Stage (ATS-300, HLR=450 cm/d, Ci=1.1 - 2.8 mg/l)

S154 Single Stage (ATS-300' HLR=200 cm/d, Ci=1.1 - 2.8 mg/l)

Residual Management

Phosphorus Removal Performance

Treatment Wetland Treatment Systems (EMA-STA, SAV-STA, and PSTA) and Managed Aquatic Plant Systems (WHS™ and ATS™)

Relationship of Phosphorus Mass Loading and Areal Removal Rates

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

0.10 1.00 10.00 100.00 1000.00

P Mass Loading Rate (g m-2 yr-1)

P A

real

Rem

oval

Rat

e (g

m-2

yr-1

)

0

400

800

1,200

1,600

2,000

2,400

2,800

3,200

3,600

4,000

4,400

P A

real

Rem

oval

Rat

e (lb

acr

e-1 yr

-1 )

Melbourne (WHS) - Ci = 2-6 mg/l

Lakeland (WHS) - Ci = 2-6 mg/l

Kissimmee (WHS) - Ci < 2 mg/l

Loxahatchee (WHS) - Ci < 2 mg/l

Iron Bridge (WHS) - Ci < 2 mg/l

S154 (WHS) - Ci < 2 mg/l

S154 (ATS, WHS Pretreatment) - Ci < 250 ppb

Patterson (ATS) - Ci = 2-6 mg/l

EAA-Everglades (ATS) - Ci < 150 ppb

Full Scale SAV,EMA-STA,PSTA in DMSTA Calibration Set - Ci < 200 ppb

S-154 ATS Single Stage - Ci < 300 ppb

Lowest Cost Treatment

$0

$5

$10

$15

$20

$25

$30

$35

$40

$45

$50

$55

$60

$65

$70

$75

$80

Pres

ent W

orth

Cos

ts ($

/lb-P

Rem

oved

)

25 MGD Algal Turf Scrubber®System - Gravity

$44.77 $36.16 $24.93 $19.72 $13.72 $11.87 $10.59 $9.38

25 MGD Algal Turf Scrubber®System - Pump Costs Included

$73.59 $59.14 $40.30 $31.60 $21.63 $18.62 $16.57 $14.60

TPIN = 80 ppb

TPIN = 100 ppb

TPIN = 150 ppb

TPIN = 200 ppb

TPIN = 300 ppb

TPIN = 400 ppb

TPIN = 500 ppb

TPIN = 600 ppb

TPIN – Total Phosphorus Inflow Concentration

[1] HydroMentia. April 2005. Single Stage ATS™ Present Worth Costs and By-Product Market Analysis