European Wastewater TAG Summary Who we are The Problem The - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
european wastewater tag
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

European Wastewater TAG Summary Who we are The Problem The - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Jan 23, 2024 365 likes •645 views

WATER & ENVIRONMENT TECHNOLOGY 23 rd March 2016 European Wastewater TAG Summary Who we are The Problem The Solution Background OptimEDAR Benefits Comparison to other Technologies Case Study Other

slide-1
SLIDE 1

WATER & ENVIRONMENT TECHNOLOGY 23rd March 2016

European Wastewater TAG

slide-2
SLIDE 2

www.adasasistemas.com

Summary

  • Who we are
  • The Problem
  • The Solution
  • Background
  • OptimEDAR
  • Benefits
  • Comparison to other Technologies
  • Case Study
  • Other Technologies
  • Examples
  • Conclusions
  • Cost
  • Status of Development and Way forward
  • Summary and Next Steps with Water Companies
  • Appendix

OptimEDAR: TAG 23rd March, 2016 | 2

slide-3
SLIDE 3

www.adasasistemas.com

25+ Years Water & Environment Expertise

Intense Technical Specialisation

Own Water Quality Monitoring Products & IT Technology

20 Years R&D and innovation

Who we are

OptimEDAR Technology developed in Spanish IDI-20080686 with the University of Badajoz, and in the CIP Eco/11/304491. ADASA, a specialised engineering company delivering technological solutions for water, the environment and meteorology.

  • Set up in 1988.
  • 13 M€ turnover (2015).
  • More than 130 employees.
  • Activity in more than 20 countries.

OptimEDAR: TAG 23rd March, 2016 | 3

slide-4
SLIDE 4

www.adasasistemas.com

The Problem GROWING CONCERN: Maintaining levels of effluent quality in a context of rising energy costs are a growing concern. Basic problems of medium and small WWTP

  • Power consumption:

A

significant portion

  • f

the consumption required in the process

  • f treating wastewater is spent in the

aeration of the biological reactor.

  • Production,

treatment and disposal of sludge,

fitting together their optimisation with the guarantee of maintaining the quality of the effluent.

OptimEDAR: TAG 23rd March, 2016 | 4

slide-5
SLIDE 5

www.adasasistemas.com

Aeration cost = 45-75% of energy (without influent / effluent pumps)

The Solution: Background

OptimEDAR: TAG 23rd March, 2016 | 5

slide-6
SLIDE 6

www.adasasistemas.com

  • Strategies for aeration optimisation.
  • Efficiency in the diffusors.
  • Actions on the aeration system.
  • Actions on the set points.
  • Maximisation of biogas production.

The Solution: Background

OptimEDAR: TAG 23rd March, 2016 | 6

slide-7
SLIDE 7

www.adasasistemas.com

The Solution: OptimEDAR

  • Optimisation of the operation of the biological

reactor in WWTP, based on an innovative on- line monitoring & control of the aeration process.

  • Main goals:
  • Reduce the energy consumption.
  • Ensure a higher quality of the effluent, specially

N+P .

  • Minimise sludge production.

Expected benefits

  • Reduce energy consumption by average 20%, by

adapting blower operation to the actual reactor load.

  • Enhanced water quality of effluents with at least 20%

less nitrogen and phosphate.

  • Reduction of 15% in the production of sewage sludge.

OptimEDAR: TAG 23rd March, 2016 | 7

slide-8
SLIDE 8

www.adasasistemas.com

The Solution: OptimEDAR

  • Description

Optimal aeration control thanks to an innovative on-line monitoring of the

biological reactor.

Application of ‘virtual sensing‘ techniques: calculation of Equivalent Organic

Charge (EOC) by measuring DO and Redox.

Blowers are operated according to EOC, instead of the typical DO control. Reduction of the blowing time while allowing longer denitrification cycles. ‘Add-in‘ solution, easy to install, based on robust probes with low

maintenance requirements.

  • Features

Simple and robust. Easy to install. It does not interfere with existing automation: superimposed on the control

system.

It adapts to changes in influent load. Reliability and easy of operation.

OptimEDAR: TAG 23rd March, 2016 | 8

slide-9
SLIDE 9

www.adasasistemas.com

  • Applicability

Active sludge WWTPs with biological reactor aerated with blowers. Specially for plants where influents suffers significant variations in organic

matter load.

  • Recommended WWTP constructive features

Reactor where is possible to establish a perfect mixture hypothesis. Enough power in the aeration system to absorb loads. Stirring system independent from aeration. High hydraulic times, or presence of homogeniser.

  • Conditions of the process

WWTP with a cyclical pattern of load. Adequate daily load, that does not saturate the operation of the plant. Non optimised control: set points of oxygen, or control by on-off time. Excess of nitrates in the effluent.

The Solution: OptimEDAR

OptimEDAR: TAG 23rd March, 2016 | 9

slide-10
SLIDE 10

www.adasasistemas.com

The Solution: OptimEDAR

(*) Using market components . Control Cabinet Sensors Cabinet Control Centre Dissolved Oxygen Sensor RedOx Sensor

OptimEDAR: TAG 23rd March, 2016 | 10

slide-11
SLIDE 11

www.adasasistemas.com

The Solution: OptimEDAR

OptimEDAR: TAG 23rd March, 2016 | 11

slide-12
SLIDE 12

www.adasasistemas.com

The Solution: Benefits

  • Reduction of operating costs.

Less energy consumption. Less reagents consumption. Less sludge treatment.

  • Increase the quality of the effluent.

Restore balance in case of major changes occur in the influent or

uncontrollable external conditions.

Stability of the biological reactor. Removal of carbonic demand. Removal of nitrogen content. High performance on phosphorus removal.

  • Improve operational efficiency.

Optimises the energy consumption. Sludge stability, providing an optimal state for water treatment.

OptimEDAR: TAG 23rd March, 2016 | 12

slide-13
SLIDE 13

www.adasasistemas.com

Type of Control Organic matter removal Nutrient Removal Optimisation

  • f power

consumption Robust equipment, low maintenance No dependence

  • n a small

range of measurement

Time Oxygen pH Ammonia Redox (OptimEDAR)

Comparison to other Technologies

 x x x    

(*) Removal of nitrate and phosphate if OFF is long. No detected peaks of contamination or NTK.

        x     x  * x

OptimEDAR: TAG 23rd March, 2016 | 13

slide-14
SLIDE 14

www.adasasistemas.com

  • WWTP
  • Population Equivalent : 4,000 PE
  • Total Volume

: 1,000 m3/day

  • Mean flow :

41.67 m3/h

  • Province:

Badajoz

  • Country:

Spain

Case Study WWTP Albuera (SPAIN)

OptimEDAR: TAG 23rd March, 2016 | 14

slide-15
SLIDE 15

www.adasasistemas.com

2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 01/12/2008 01/12/2008 02/12/2008 02/12/2008 03/12/2008 03/12/2008 04/12/2008 04/12/2008 05/12/2008
  • 200
  • 150
  • 100
  • 50
50 100 150 200 250 OXIGENO REDOX 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 12/12/2008 12/12/2008 13/12/2008 13/12/2008 14/12/2008 14/12/2008 15/12/2008 15/12/2008 16/12/2008
  • 200
  • 150
  • 100
  • 50
50 100 150 200 250 OXIGENO ECO REDOX

BEFORE OptimEDAR AFTER OptimEDAR

20% energy saving

Oxygen demand curve shows a decreasing of the operation time and the number of maneuvers for blowers.

Important reduction of nitrates concentration after installing OptimEDAR: 3 days after the commissioning the nitrate concentration fell from 170 mg/l to 4 mg/l.

Nitrates Concentration (WWTP Output)

Case Study: WWTP Albuera (SPAIN)

OptimEDAR: TAG 23rd March, 2016 | 15

slide-16
SLIDE 16

www.adasasistemas.com

Case Study: WWTP Carme (SPAIN)

  • WWTP
  • Population equivalent: 4,023 PE
  • Mean flow:

518 m3/day

  • Province:

Barcelona

  • Country:

Spain

OptimEDAR: TAG 23rd March, 2016 | 16

slide-17
SLIDE 17

www.adasasistemas.com

  • Energy consumption

1 Biologic Reactor Oxygen Control (1 month) OptimEDAR (1 month) Blowing ON (monthly hours, estimated) 212 165 Power consumption blower 22 kw (kwh) 4,675 3,630 % Blowers energy reduction 22% February 2013 (without OptimEDAR) February 2014 (with OptimEDAR) DQO (mg/l) Input: 240; Output:12 95% Input: 1,365; Output: 16 96% DBO (mg/l) Input: 87; Output: 6 93% Input: 133; Output: 3 98% N Total (mgN/l) Input: 42.9; Output: 32 25% Input: 33.74; Output: 7.41 78% P total (mgP/l) Input: 5.54; Output: 2.6 53% Input: 4.43; Output: 2.25 49%

  • Plant Performance

Case Study Case: WWTP Carme (SPAIN)

OptimEDAR: TAG 23rd March, 2016 | 17

slide-18
SLIDE 18

www.adasasistemas.com

  • Cost to the end user

* 1 € = 0,7807 £

  • ROI
  • Only in energy, depends on the power of blowers: up to 2 years
  • OPEX
  • Maintenance of proves

Cost

DESCRIPTION Recommended Retail Price * Optimedar: control and probes cabinets 19.504 € / 15.227 £ Engineering (without travels) 13.440 € / 10.493 £ Installation (without travels) 7.840 € / 6.121 £ Maintenance and adjustments 1 year (without travels) 10.020 € / 7.823 £

OptimEDAR: TAG 23rd March, 2016 | 18

slide-19
SLIDE 19

www.adasasistemas.com

Status of Development and Way Forward

  • What is currently operating in the field?
  • Two WWTP under demonstration in R3Water project:
  • Empuriabrava (Spain). Demonstration in a medium plant (70.000 PE)

with high seasonality.

  • Wijer (Belgium). Demonstration in a small plant with specific

phosphorous removal requirements.

  • How do you wish to proceed in the market?
  • Agreement with water utilities in charge of WWTP operation.
  • Agreement with added value distributors or engineering companies.

OptimEDAR: TAG 23rd March, 2016 | 19

slide-20
SLIDE 20

www.adasasistemas.com

Summary

  • Why the technology is superior to the existing solutions?
  • Decrease of the operating costs.
  • Optimise energy consumption by adapting the operation to the actual load of the

reactor.

  • Improves stability and reduction of sludge generated.
  • Ensure the quality of the effluent.
  • Reduces the content of organic matter.
  • Decrease the nitrogen content.
  • High performance in phosphorus removal.
  • Improve the quality of the treatment.
  • Stable operation of the biological reactor.
  • Achievement of the balance in case of influent variations or uncontrollable external

conditions.

  • Reduce installation costs.
  • Easily installable solution.
  • Return on investment based on the size / plant consumption.

OptimEDAR: TAG 23rd March, 2016 | 20

slide-21
SLIDE 21

www.adasasistemas.com

Next Steps

  • How would you like to proceed with the water utilities?
  • Agreement for installation.
  • Would you like to develop a partnership?
  • The partnership would be an option if it includes the market introduction.
  • Several possibilities would be studied according to the partner capabilities

(water utilities, distributors or engineering companies).

  • Do you need a licensee in Europe?
  • No.

OptimEDAR: TAG 23rd March, 2016 | 21

slide-22
SLIDE 22

www.adasasistemas.com www.adasaproducts.com

Thanks for your attendance

slide-23
SLIDE 23

www.adasasistemas.com

Annex: OptimEDAR Example Operation

  • Oxygen

Control

  • OptimEDAR

Control

OptimEDAR: TAG 23rd March, 2016 | 23

slide-24
SLIDE 24

www.adasasistemas.com

Case Study: WWTP Empuriabrava (SPAIN)

  • WWTP
  • Population equivalent: 70.000 PE
  • Mean flow:

16.000 m3/day

  • Province:

Girona

  • Country:

Spain

OptimEDAR: TAG 23rd March, 2016 | 24

slide-25
SLIDE 25

www.adasasistemas.com

  • Energy consumption

1 Biologic Reactor Oxygen Control (1 month) OptimEDAR (1 month) Blowing ON (monthly hours, estimated) 325 274 Power consumption blower 75 kw (kwh) 41.041 35.379 % Blowers energy reduction 14% February 2014 (without OptimEDAR) February 2015 (with OptimEDAR) DQO (mg/l) Input: 317; Output: 41 87% Input: 522; Output: 30 94% DBO (mg/l) Input: 169; Output: 3 98% Input: 215; Output: 3 99% N Total (mgN/l) Input: 35; Output: 6,5 89% Input: 57,5; Output: 2,6 95% P total (mgP/l) Input: 6,3; Output: 3,9 38% Input: 6,25; Output: 1,12 90%

  • Plant Performance

Case Study: WWTP Empuriabrava (SPAIN)

OptimEDAR: TAG 23rd March, 2016 | 25

Control since October 2015.

slide-26
SLIDE 26

www.adasasistemas.com

Case Study: WWTP Wijer (BELGIUM)

  • WWTP
  • Population equivalent: 1.440 PE
  • Max flow:

2.473 m3/day

  • Country:

Belgium

OptimEDAR: TAG 23rd March, 2016 | 26

slide-27
SLIDE 27

www.adasasistemas.com

  • Energy consumption

1 Biologic Reactor Oxygen Control (1 month) OptimEDAR (1 month) Blowing ON (monthly hours, estimated) Power consumption blower 15 kw (kwh) % Blowers energy reduction January 2015 (without OptimEDAR) Xxxxx 2016 (with OptimEDAR) DQO (mg/l) Input: 110; Output: 23 79% DBO (mg/l) Input: 41; Output: 3 93% N Total (mgN/l) Input: 14,4; Output: 5,0 65% P total (mgP/l) Input: 1,6; Output: 0,4 75%

  • Plant Performance

Control since February 2016. Adjusting OptimEDAR to operate under conditions in which we have never worked. Current conditions: low water temperatures (<10 ° C); low nitrogen loadings dilution (NH4 < 10 ppm, NO3 > 3 ppm) with low organic matter (BOD < 75ppm).

OptimEDAR: TAG 23rd March, 2016 | 27

Case Study: WWTP Wijer (BELGIUM)