Opportunities for improved nutrient removal and recovery from municipal wastewater Nutrient removal practice and developing trends Damian J. Kruk, Tanner R. Devlin, Jan A. Oleszkiewicz Webinar, October 22 nd ; 2015
Biological N removal 1. Modified Ludzcak-Ettinger (MLE) • TN removal • Defined Aerobic and Anoxic zones IR SC Effluent Anx Aer Influent RAS Nutrie nt Re mo va l Oc to b e r 22 nd , 2015 2 a nd Re c o ve ry We b ina r
Biological N removal 2. CAS Extended aeration • E.g. oxidation ditch • Only nitrification • SRT > 10d Aerator Effluent SC RAS Influent Sludge Nutrie nt Re mo va l Oc to b e r 22 nd , 2015 3 a nd Re c o ve ry We b ina r
Biological N removal 3. Carousel oxidation ditch • Both processes occur in the same tank Simultaneous Nite/Denite • Extended SRT required Aerator Anoxic Effluent SC Aerobic RAS Influent Sludge Nutrie nt Re mo va l Oc to b e r 22 nd , 2015 4 a nd Re c o ve ry We b ina r
Biological P removal EBPR: PAO metabolism Anaerobic Aerobic Effluent PE Nutrie nt Re mo va l Oc to b e r 22 nd , 2015 5 a nd Re c o ve ry We b ina r
Biological P removal EBPR: PAO metabolism Anaerobic Aerobic Effluent PE PO 4 -P Nutrie nt Re mo va l Oc to b e r 22 nd , 2015 6 a nd Re c o ve ry We b ina r
Biological P removal EBPR: PAO metabolism Anaerobic Aerobic Effluent PE PO 4 -P P removed in WAS Nutrie nt Re mo va l Oc to b e r 22 nd , 2015 7 a nd Re c o ve ry We b ina r
Biological P removal EBPR: PAO metabolism EBPR needs VFA! Anaerobic Aerobic Effluent PE PO 4 -P P removed in WAS Nutrie nt Re mo va l Oc to b e r 22 nd , 2015 8 a nd Re c o ve ry We b ina r
BNR with EBPR Simultaneous N and P removal Influent Effluent Ax Aer S.C. NOx recycle RAS WAS Nutrie nt Re mo va l Oc to b e r 22 nd , 2015 9 a nd Re c o ve ry We b ina r
BNR with EBPR • Reduce ORP in Anaerobic zone Influent Effluent Ana Ax Aer S.C. NOx recycle RAS NO x !!! WAS (containing P) Nutrie nt Re mo va l Oc to b e r 22 nd , 2015 10 a nd Re c o ve ry We b ina r
BNR with EBPR • Reduce ORP in Anaerobic zone Influent Effluent A Ana Ax Aer S.C. x NOx recycle RAS WAS (containing P) Nutrie nt Re mo va l Oc to b e r 22 nd , 2015 11 a nd Re c o ve ry We b ina r
BNR with EBPR • Reduce ORP in VFA Anaerobic zone Fermenter • Provide sufficient Influent VFA Effluent A Ana Ax Aer S.C. x NOx recycle RAS WAS (containing P) Nutrie nt Re mo va l Oc to b e r 22 nd , 2015 12 a nd Re c o ve ry We b ina r
Chem. P removal: Coagulation • Al and Fe salts: Al 3+ ; Fe 3+ • Small footprint • Easy to retrofit Nutrie nt Re mo va l Oc to b e r 22 nd , 2015 13 a nd Re c o ve ry We b ina r
Chem. P removal: Coagulation • Al and Fe salts: Al 3+ ; Fe 3+ • Small footprint • Easy to retrofit … but: • Higher sludge production • High chemical costs • Prevents recovery from liquid phase Nutrie nt Re mo va l Oc to b e r 22 nd , 2015 14 a nd Re c o ve ry We b ina r
Ferric dose for P precipitation Data Dr S Hermanowicz, UC Berkeley 100 10 Fe:P (mol:mol) 1 0.1 0.01 0.1 1 10 Effluent P (mg/L) Nutrie nt Re mo va l Oc to b e r 22 nd , 2015 15 a nd Re c o ve ry We b ina r
Ferric dose for P precipitation Data Dr S Hermanowicz, UC Berkeley 100 Target P < 0.1 mg/L ↓ Ferric dose skyrockets 10 Fe:P (mol:mol) 1 0.1 0.01 0.1 1 10 Effluent P (mg/L) Nutrie nt Re mo va l Oc to b e r 22 nd , 2015 16 a nd Re c o ve ry We b ina r
EBPR vs + Chem. P Data Dr S Hermanowicz, UC Berkeley 100 Chem. P EBPR 10 Fe:P (mol:mol) 1 0.1 0.01 0.1 1 10 Effluent P (mg/L) Nutrie nt Re mo va l Oc to b e r 22 nd , 2015 19 a nd Re c o ve ry We b ina r
EBPR vs + Chem. P Data Dr S Hermanowicz, UC Berkeley 100 Chem. P EBPR 10 Fe:P (mol:mol) 1 EBPR to the limit of carbon + Chem. P for the reminder 0.1 0.01 0.1 1 10 Effluent P (mg/L) Nutrie nt Re mo va l Oc to b e r 22 nd , 2015 20 a nd Re c o ve ry We b ina r
Key issues of nutrient removal 1. Oxygen demand • DN is advantageous o Reduction of oxygen demand 1 kg NO 3 -N removed = 2.9 kg O 2 saved o Recovers Alkalinity Nutrie nt Re mo va l Oc to b e r 22 nd , 2015 21 a nd Re c o ve ry We b ina r
Key issues of nutrient removal 1. Oxygen demand • DN is advantageous o Reduction of oxygen demand 1 kg NO 3 -N removed = 2.9 kg O 2 saved o Recovers Alkalinity • Sidestream PN/Anammox Nutrie nt Re mo va l Oc to b e r 22 nd , 2015 22 a nd Re c o ve ry We b ina r
Biological N removal Nitrification Denitrification - NO 3 Autotrophic Heterotrophic 40% 25% O 2 carbon 4.5 kg O 2 /kg 2.9 kg COD/kg - - NO 2 NO 2 60% 75% O 2 carbon + NH 4 N 2 Nutrie nt Re mo va l Oc to b e r 22 nd , 2015 23 a nd Re c o ve ry We b ina r
PN/Anammox - NO 3 40% 25% O 2 carbon - - ~60% NO 2 NO 2 60% 45% O 2 carbon AOB AMX + NH 4 - N 2 and ~10% NO 3 Nutrie nt Re mo va l Oc to b e r 22 nd , 2015 24 a nd Re c o ve ry We b ina r
PN/Anammox - NO 3 40% 25% O 2 carbon Savings: • 55% O 2 demand - - ~60% NO 2 NO 2 • 90% carbon demand 60% 45% O 2 carbon AOB AMX + NH 4 - N 2 and ~10% NO 3 Nutrie nt Re mo va l Oc to b e r 22 nd , 2015 25 a nd Re c o ve ry We b ina r
Key issues of nutrient removal 2. Carbon demand • Approx. requirements In Out o 6 g bCOD/g N mg N /L 35 5 mg P /L o 20 g bCOD/g P 5.5 0.5 Need: 280 mg bCOD/L Missing: Have: 33 mg bCOD/L 380*0.65 = 247 mg bCOD/L Nutrie nt Re mo va l Oc to b e r 22 nd , 2015 26 a nd Re c o ve ry We b ina r
Key issues of nutrient removal 2. Carbon demand Possible improvements: • Fermentation of PS + 34 mg bCOD/L (VFA) • Sidestream PN/Anammox + 47 mg bCOD/L • Sidestreeam P recovery + 80 mg bCOD/L • Simultaneous Nite/Dinite • Supplemental COD • Chem. P removal Nutrie nt Re mo va l Oc to b e r 22 nd , 2015 27 a nd Re c o ve ry We b ina r
Key issues of nutrient removal 2. Carbon demand Possible improvements: • Fermentation of PS + 34 mg bCOD/L (VFA) • Sidestream PN/Anammox + 47 mg bCOD/L • Sidestreeam P recovery + 80 mg bCOD/L • Simultaneous Nite/Dinite In many cases • Supplemental COD fermentation is enough • Chem. P removal Nutrie nt Re mo va l Oc to b e r 22 nd , 2015 28 a nd Re c o ve ry We b ina r
Key issues of nutrient removal 3. Limit of technology TP TAN TN Process mg P/L mg N/L mg N/L 5 <3 25 CAS EA <0.3 <1 <7 CAS EA with SND + Chem. P <0.3 <1 <7 BNR with adequate VFA <0.1 <1 <7 BNR with adequate VFA + Filtration <0.1 <1 <7 CAS EA with SND+ ballasted flocculation 0.01 <1 <3 BNR + post DN + post-precipitation + UF Nutrie nt Re mo va l Oc to b e r 22 nd , 2015 29 a nd Re c o ve ry We b ina r
Key issues of nutrient removal 3. Limit of technology TP TAN TN Process mg P/L mg N/L mg N/L 5 <3 25 CAS EA <0.3 <1 <7 CAS EA with SND + Chem. P <0.3 <1 <7 BNR with adequate VFA <0.1 <1 <7 BNR with adequate VFA + Filtration <0.1 <1 <7 CAS EA with SND+ ballasted flocculation 0.01 <1 <3 BNR + post DN + post-precipitation + UF Nutrie nt Re mo va l Oc to b e r 22 nd , 2015 30 a nd Re c o ve ry We b ina r
Key issues of nutrient removal 3. Limit of technology TP TAN TN Process mg P/L mg N/L mg N/L 5 <3 25 CAS EA <0.3 <1 <7 CAS EA with SND + Chem. P <0.3 <1 <7 BNR with adequate VFA <0.1 <1 <7 BNR with adequate VFA + Filtration <0.1 <1 <7 CAS EA with SND+ ballasted flocculation 0.01 <1 <3 BNR + post DN + post-precipitation + UF Nutrie nt Re mo va l Oc to b e r 22 nd , 2015 31 a nd Re c o ve ry We b ina r
Key issues of nutrient removal 3. Limit of technology rDON is the TP TAN TN Process absolute TN limit mg P/L mg N/L mg N/L (1 to 2 mg/L) 5 <3 25 CAS EA <0.3 <1 <7 CAS EA with SND + Chem. P <0.3 <1 <7 BNR with adequate VFA <0.1 <1 <7 BNR with adequate VFA + Filtration <0.1 <1 <7 CAS EA with SND+ ballasted flocculation 0.01 <1 <3 BNR + post DN + post-precipitation + UF Nutrie nt Re mo va l Oc to b e r 22 nd , 2015 32 a nd Re c o ve ry We b ina r
High costs of low limits Total present worth for a 38 MLD WWTP TN 2 350 TP <0.02 300 Million $ TN 3 TN 4-8 250 TP<0.1 TP 0.1-03 TN 8 200 TP 1 No N, P 150 100 50 The last 1.1 t P/a The first 70 t P/a 0 costs US $100 M costs US $40 M 1 2 3 4 5 from JB Neethling, HDR, 16 May, 2012, WERF CBP STAC Workshop Oc to b e r 22 nd , 2015 33
Opportunities for improved nutrient removal and recovery from municipal wastewater Thank you
Opportunities for improved nutrient removal and recovery from municipal wastewater Nutrient Recovery and Reuse: Practice and Developing Trends Tanner R. Devlin, Damian J. Kruk, Jan A. Oleszkiewicz Webinar, October 22 nd , 2015
Recovery and reuse practice Should we recover or reuse nutrients? If 1. Recognized ROI ; or 2. Mandated Then yes! Fluctuating market: • Phosphorus = $0.75/kg P • Ammonium = $0.20/kg N • Dried biosolids = $0.15/kg DS 22/ 10/ 2015 2
Recommend
More recommend
