Reducing Taste and Odor and Other Algae-Related Problems for Surface - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Reducing Taste and Odor and Other Algae-Related Problems for Surface Water Supplies in Arid Environments

Final Report

A Cooperative Research and Implementation Program Arizona State University (Tempe, AZ) Milton Sommerfeld, Paul Westerhoff, Larry Baker, Qiang Hu, Thomas Dempster, Mario Esparza, Mari Rodriquez, Samanth Dawson, Kirsten Hintze, Michelle Cummings, My-linh Nguyen, and Marisa Marsles Salt River Project Central Arizona Project and the City of Phoenix August 2002

Introduction and Overview

GOAL

Develop a comprehensive management strategy to reduce algae-related water quality problems for drinking water supplies in arid environments

Specific Objectives

Integrate results for implementation of multiple- barrier approach to controlling T & O problems Conduct controlled lab and field-scale experiments to evaluate T & O control practices Conduct preliminary feasibility analysis for potential T & O control measures based on technical, economic and political considerations Develop a thorough understanding of conditions leading to T & O problems

Specific Objectives

Extrapolate applied research findings for Arizona to water treatment systems in other arid environments Develop a long term monitoring plan that will allow Phoenix and other municipalities to forecast the occurrence of T & O problems Quantify the extent to which reservoir algae produces DOC and the reactivity of the DOC in DBP formation

Project Tasks

MONITORING MULTI-BARRIER TREATMENT OPTIONS FUNDAMENTAL INSIGHTS IMPLEMENTATION

↓

Monitoring Program – Algae and water quality parameters Task 1: Experimental Evaluation of T&O control measures Task 2: Assessment of in-plant controls Task 3: Controlled Lab and field-scale T&O reduction experiments Task 4: Studies of DOC source, characterization, and treatability Task 5: Phased-in T&O implementation program Task 7: Midcourse feasibility analysis Task 6: Guidance document and final report Task 8:

Presentation Outline

Summary of Research Products Summary of Monitoring Activities Summary of Research Activities Summary of Implementation Activities Overview of Guidance Manual Recommendations & Future Needs Integration for Regional T&O Control

Summary of Research Products

Presentations at local, regional, and national conferences (15) MS and PhD Theses completed or partially completed (6) Journal Articles published, in-press, or submitted (6) Related Project Funding:

AWWARF (3 Projects) Salt River Project (2 Projects) City of Tempe (2 Projects) City of Chandler (1 Project)

Final Report (PDF on Web) Guidance Manual (PDF on Web) Taxonomy Guide (available on Web)

Presentation Outline

Summary of Research Products Summary of Monitoring Activities Summary of Research Activities Summary of Implementation Activities Overview of Guidance Manual Recommendations & Future Needs Integration for Regional T&O Control

Summary of Monitoring-Related Activities

Baseline monitoring program (Task 1)

Purpose: To understand spatial and temporal patterns in water quality parameters that affect algae productivity and occurrence of T&O compounds

Studies of DOC sources and characterization (Task 5)

Purpose: To identify algae-sources of DOC and characterize DOC in the watershed

Assessment of in-plant controls (Task 3)

Purpose: To identify sources of T&O in WTPs and treatment capability to remove T&O compounds

Sampling Program

• 10

20 30 40 50 10 15 20 25 30 Water Temperature (

• C)

De pth fro m Su rfa ce (m ) Saguaro Lake Lake Pleasant Bartlett Lake

Representative Data: Lake Stratification

Representative Data: MIB Depth Stratification

Data from samples collected Aug. 30, 2001 (Saguaro Lake)

Epilimnion Hypolimnion

Depth MIB ng/L Geosmin ng/L

• C

D.O. mg/L 0 m 46 7 28.0 7 5 m 36 7 25.8 4 10 m 19 5 24.3 2 15 m 16 6 23.8 2 20 m 12 4 23.5 2 25 m 12 4 23.4 2 30 m 5 4 22.9 2

Aug-99 Oct-99 Dec-99 Feb-00 Apr-00 Jun-00 Aug-00 Oct-00 Dec-00 Feb-01 Apr-01 Jun-01 Aug-01 Oct-01 Dec-01 Jan-02 Apr-02

R1 R2A R2B R3 R4 R4dup R5 R6A R6B R7 R8 R9A R9Adup R9B R10 R11 R12 R13 R14 R15 R16 R17 R18 R19 R20 R21 R22 R25 R26

0-10 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-50 50-60 60-70 70-80 80-90 90-100

Representative Data: MIB

Aug-99 Oct-99 Dec-99 Feb-00 Apr-00 Jun-00 Aug-00 Oct-00 Dec-00 Feb-01 Apr-01 Jun-01 Aug-01 Oct-01 Dec-01 Jan-02 Apr-02

R1 R2A R2B R3 R4 R4dup R5 R6A R6B R7 R8 R9A R9Adup R9B R10 R11 R12 R13 R14 R15 R16 R17 R18 R19 R20 R21 R22 R25 R26

0-5 5-10 10-15 15-20

Representative Data: MIB > Geosmin

10 20 30 40 50 60 A-99 N-99 F-00 M-00 A-00 N-00 F-01 M-01 A-01 N-01 J-02 M-02 MIB Concentration (ng/L) R5 R6A R6B R7

Representative Data: Temporal MIB (Lake)

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 A-99 N-99 F-00 M-00 A-00 N-00 F-01 M-01 A-01 N-01 J-02 M-02 MIB Concentration (ng/L) R13 R14 R16 290 ng/L

Representative Data: Temporal MIB (Canal)

Comprehensive Taxa List

Diatoms (102)

Achnanthes coffieformis Denticula rainierensis Mastogloia elliptica Nitzschia paradoxa Achnanthes linearis Denticula sp. Mastogloia smithii Nitzschia parvula Achnanthes microcephala Diatoma anceps Melosira granulata Nitzschia tryblionella Achnanthes minutissima Diatoma hiemale Melosira sp. Nitzschia sigma Amphora ovalis Diatoma tenue Melosira varians Nitzschia sigmoidea Amphora venata Diatoma vulgare Navicula accomoda Nitzschia sinuata Asterionella formosa Diploneis smithii Navicula cari Nitzschia sp. Bacillaria paradoxa Entomoneis paludosa Navicula cocconeiformis Nitzschia vermicularis Biddulphia laevis Epithemia argus Navicula cryptocephala Pinnularia brebissonii Cocconeis diminuta Epithemia intermedia Navicula decussis Pleurosigma delicatum Cocconeis pediculus Epithemia sorex Navicula exigua Rhizosolenia sp. Coscinodiscus denarius Epithemia turgida Navicula mutica Rhoicosphenia curvata Cyclotella bodanica Eunotia sp. Navicula pupula Rhopalodia gibba Cyclotella meneghiniana Fragilaria arcus Navicula sp. Rhopalodia gibberula Cymatopleura solea Fragilaria brevistriata Nitzschia accedans Stephanodiscus sp. Cymatopleura sp. Fragilaria chains Nitzschia acicularis Surirella brightwellii Cymbella affinis Fragilaria construens Nitzschia apiculata Surirella ovalis Cymbella mexicana Fragilaria crotenensis Nitzschia bicrena Surirella striatula Cymbella minuta Fragilaria leptostauron Nitzschia bita Synedra actinostroides Cymbella norvegica Fragilaria sp. Nitzschia capitellata Synedra affinis Cymbella prostrata Gomphonema intricatum Nitzschia communis Synedra goulardii Cymbella pusilla Gomphonema olivaceum Nitzschia denticula Synedra rumpens Cymbella sp. Gomphonema parvulum Nitzschia filiformis Synedra sp. Cymbella turgida Gomphonema sp. Nitzschia fonticola Synedra ulna Cymbella ventricosa Gyrosigma sp. Nitzschia frustulum Denticula elegans Hantzschia amphioxys Nitzschia palea

Comprehensive Taxa List (cont.)

Chlorophyta (24) Chlorophyta (cont.) Other (10)

Ankistrodesmus sp. Spirogyra sp. Ceratium sp. Chlamydomonas sp. Staurastrum sp. Cryptomonas sp. Chlorella sp. Tetracystis sp. Dinobryon sp. Closterium sp. Tetrahedron sp. Euglena sp. Coleochaete sp. Ulothrix sp. Mallomonas sp. Cosmarium sp. Ophiocytium sp. Eudorina sp.

Cyanophyta (12)

Peridinium sp. Franceia sp. Anabaena sp. Phacus sp. Golenkinia minutissima Aphanothece sp. Synura sp. Golenkinia sp. Chroothece sp. Vaucheria sp. Gonium sp. Cylindrospermum sp. Microspora sp. Gloeocapsa sp. Mougeoutia sp. Gomphosphaeria sp. Oocystis sp. Merismopedia sp. Pandorina sp. Microcystis sp. Pediastrum sp. Oscillatoria sp. Pyramimonas sp. Phormidium sp. Scenedesmus sp. Pseudanabaena sp. Selenastrum sp. Spirulina sp.

30 60 90 120

Jan-00 Mar-00 May-00 Jul-00 Sep-00 Nov-00 Jan-01 Mar-01 May-01 Jul-01 Sep-01

MIB (ng/L)

75 150 225 300

Cyanophyte Numbers

9A MIB 9B MIB 9A Cyanophytes 9B Cyanophytes

Saguaro Lake MIB Concentrations and Cyanophyte Numbers

40 80 120 Jan-00 Mar-00 May-00 Jul-00 Sep-00 Nov-00 Jan-01 Mar-01 May-01 Jul-01 Sep-01

MIB (ng/L)

40 80 120 160

Oscillatoriaceae Numbers

9A MIB 9B MIB 9A Oscillatoriaceae 9B Oscillatoriaceae

Saguaro Lake MIB Concentrations and Oscillatoriaceae Numbers

Summary & Conclusions (Task 1)

MIB was dominant T&O compound in watershed and finished water # of algae species capable of producing T&O compounds is a very small amount of the total biomass “Hot spots” for T&O production exist in epilimnion of lakes and localized canal sections Temperature in lakes is a good indicator for T&O concentrations, whereas nutrient levels and chlorophyll-a are not related Lake destratification can cause a pulse of T&O for 1-2 months

Summary of Monitoring-Related Activities

Baseline monitoring program (Task 1)

Purpose: To understand spatial and temporal patterns in water quality parameters that affect algae productivity and occurrence of T&O compounds

Studies of DOC sources and characterization (Task 5)

Purpose: To identify algae-sources of DOC and characterize DOC in the watershed

Assessment of in-plant controls (Task 3)

Purpose: To identify sources of T&O in WTPs and treatment capability to remove T&O compounds

DOC Concentrations

CAP-Pleasant System 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 R1 R2A R2B R3 R4 R11 DOC, mg/L 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 DOC, mg/L Average Max Min Median

Lower Salt River System

0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 R8 R9A R9B R10 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 DOC, mg/L

Average Max Min Median SRP canal- COP WTPs System

0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 R12 R13 R14 R15 R16 R17 R18 R19 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0

DOC, mg/L Average Max Min Median Verde River System 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 R20 R5 R6A R6B R7 DOC, mg/L

Average Max Min Median

Influence of Hydrology on DOC Transport

Max flow (9/24/99): 7350 cfs Min flow (7/5/99): 67 cfs Average flow: 313 cfs Median flow: 240 cfs

0.0E+00 1.0E+03 2.0E+03 3.0E+03 4.0E+03 5.0E+03 6.0E+03 7.0E+03 8.0E+03 Jun-99 Sep-99 Dec-99 Mar-00 Jul-00 Oct-00 Jan-01 May-01 Flow, cfs 2 4 6 8 DOC, mg/L Flow(cfs) Ci, mg/L

Algae growth experiment

Fluorescence light set (3 sets /panel) Humidifier Water bath Air flow control Air filter .45 µm Air supply Vertical light panel Tubular glass reactors (0.9L)

Airflow control Humidifier Air filter .45 µm Fluorescence light set (3 sets /panel) Vertical light panel Air supply Rectangular glass reactor (20L)

Phase I- Three different algae speices: Growth,DOC production, THM formation Phase II- Green algae DOC characterization

Phase I- Results

0.0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6

50 100 150 200

OD730, cm-1 10 20 30 50 100 150 200 DOC, mg/L

Time, hours Scenedesmus Oscillatoria Chaetosceros

Algae growth

20 40 60 80 50 100 150 200 CHCl3 : DOC, ug/mg

THM reactivity DOC production

Time, hours

Characteristics of Fulvic Acids Isolated from the Verde River System

0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 25 50 75 100 C/N ratio, mg/mg Ar-C/Al-C, mg/mg R20 R5 R6A R7 ALG-FA SRFA

SRFA: Terrestrial source Algal source Spring Runoff 3/05/01 HS release 9/01/00 (storage 6/03-8/16/00, low RO) HS release 12/12/00 (following upstream RO event 10/22 - 11/14/00)

Source Water THM Formation (SDS)

Low Bromide incorporated THM, n ≤ 1 CAP-Pleasant TTHM/DOC: 21 ± 2 µg/mg Verde system TTHM/DOC: 42 ± 10 µg/mg Lower Salt R. TTHM/DOC: 33 ± 2 µg/mg 40 80 120 160 200 R1 R2A R2B R3 R4 R11 R20 R5 R6A R6B R7 R8 R9A R9B R10 TTHM, ug/L

AVERAGE MAX MIN MEDIAN

Verde River CAP - Lake Pleasant Lower Salt R.

Source Water HAA9 Formation (SDS)

20 40 60 80 R1 R2A R2B R3 R4 R11 R20 R5 R6A R6B R7 R8 R9A R9B R10 HAA9,ug/L

Average Max Min Median

Verde River CAP - Lake Pleasant Lower Salt R.

CAP-Pleasant: HAA5/DOC > 7 ± 1 µg/mg Verde system: HAA5/DOC > 15 ± 2 µg/mg Lower Salt R.: HAA5/DOC > 9 ± 0 µg/mg DiHAA dominate

Summary & Conclusions (Task 5)

DOC sources include: snowmelt and monsoon runoff, algae DOC in southwestern US (DOC/DON ~ 15) differs from DOC east of the Mississippi Algae-DOC can be rapidly biodegraded Increasing reservoir HRTs allows algae-DOC to biodegrade Watershed DOC produces more THMs than HAAs. Algae-DOC produces more HAAs than THMs. Salt River > Verde River > CAP for DBP formation DOC removal by COP WTPs ranged from 5% to 55% (median = 15%) Data provides baseline to evaluate future conditions (e.g., impacts of fires, high-runoff years)

Summary of Monitoring-Related Activities

Baseline monitoring program (Task 1)

Purpose: To understand spatial and temporal patterns in water quality parameters that affect algae productivity and occurrence of T&O compounds

Studies of DOC sources and characterization (Task 5)

Purpose: To identify algae-sources of DOC and characterize DOC in the watershed

Assessment of in-plant controls (Task 3)

Purpose: To identify sources of T&O in WTPs and treatment capability to remove T&O compounds

Conclusions from In-Plant Interviews, Tours, Monthly visits conducted

No in-plant T&O production observed, probably due to periodic prechlorination T&O removal only occurred while adding PAC Historic low-bid approach for PAC selection did not optimize T&O removal PAC feed systems are rated too low (< 15 ppm) and should be improved Basis for adding PAC or selecting PAC dose was arbitrary Minimizing T&O levels in the raw water is critical GAC filter caps or GAC adsorption would improve T&O removal and reduce PAC usage; also improve DOC removal

Presentation Outline

Summary of Research Products Summary of Monitoring Activities Summary of Research Activities Summary of Implementation Activities Overview of Guidance Manual Recommendations & Future Needs Integration for Regional T&O Control

Laboratory Experiments (Task 4)

Algae related: Isolation of MIB/geosmin producers Confirmation of MIB/geosmin production Effect of environmental conditions on production

Temperature Light Nutrients

Intra-and extra-cellular MIB/geosmin

Culturing and Isolation

Algae Isolates from All Sites

200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 Total Isolates Blue- greens Greens Diatoms Other

1292 873 196 181 42

Time (min)

0 10.0 12.5 15.0 17.5 20.0 MIB MIB geosmin IPMP IPMP IPMP geosmin Oscillatoria splendida (geosmin producer)

MIB & Geosmin Standards (20 ng/L each)

Phormidium sp (MIB producer) CH3 CH3 CH3 CH3 OH geosmin CH3 CH3 CH3 MIB (2-methylisoborneol)

Confirmed Producers

Pseudanabaena sp. #3 Streptomyces sp. Pseudanabaena sp. #2 Oscillatoria splendida Pseudanabaena sp. #1 Oscillatoria agardhii Phormidium sp. Geosmin Producers MIB Producers

Producers of MIB and Geosmin

MIB Producers

Phormidium sp. Pseudanabaena sp.

Geosmin Producers

Oscillatoria agardhii Oscillatoria splendida

1000 2000 3000 4000 10 20 30 40 Time (days) Cell bound MIB (ug L-1) 0.5 1 1.5 2 10 20 30 40 Time (days) Chlorophyll a (mg L-1)

50 100 150 200 250 300 10 20 30 40 Time (days) Released MIB (ug L-1)

Effect of temperature on growth, production and release of MIB by Pseudanabaena sp.

350C 250C 200C 120C

0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2 5 10 15 20 25 30 Time (days) Chlorophyll a (mg L-1)

50 100 150 5 10 15 20 25 30 Time (days) Released MIB (ug L-1) 400 800 1200 1600 2000 5 10 15 20 25 30 Time (days) Cell bound MIB (ug L-1)

Effect of light intensity on growth, production and release of MIB in Pseudanabaena sp.

100 50 25 5

0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 Chlorophyll a (ug L-1)

50 100 150 200 5 10 15 20 Time (days) MIB (ug L-1)

• nset of dark incubation

Effect of dark incubation on production and release of MIB in Pseudanabaena sp.

Cell bound Released

5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Time (days) Release MIB/ cell bound MIB (ug/ug)

Effect of temperature on the ratio of MIB released relative to MIB produced in cultures of Pseudanabaena sp.

12 35 25 20

0C:

Effect of dark incubation on chlorophyll a content, the production and release of geosmin

4 8 12 16 7 14 18 25 200 400 600 800

0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8

Time (days) Chlorophyll a (ug/L) Geosmin in Medium (ug/L) Geosmin in cells (ug/L)

Effect of nitrate and phosphate on the growth and release of geosmin

Treatments

0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 200 400 600 800

Geosmin in Medium (ug/L) Geosmin in Cells/chl-a

control +P +N +P/+N

Laboratory Experiments (Task 4)

Water treatment related:

Comparative effectiveness of PAC types PAC dosing to achieve removal to 10 ng/L Ozone oxidation of MIB/geosmin

PAC Experiments (AZ Canal)

Removal of MIB & Geosmin

37 40 21 17 12 7 7 7 6 6 46 47 13 8 5 4 2 2 3

10 20 30 40 50 60 control 0 control 4 wcarb hdb hdo wpl wph w20 ac800 wpm MIB and Geosmin remaining (ng/L) MIB (ng/L) Geosmin (ng/L) MIB initial (ng/L) Geosmin initial (ng/L)

PAC Dosing

Predicting MIB removal to achieve 10 ng/L MIB in finished water: PAC Dose (mgNorit 20B/L) = 10.8xln(MIBraw) – 24.8

5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 Norit 20B PAC dose (mg/L) Finished Water MIB (ng/L) 90 80 70 60 50

30

40 20 10 100

• 4
• 3
• 2
• 1

5 10 15 20 Batch Ozonation Time (minutes) ln (C/Co)

MIB (O3=6 mg/L) Geosmin (O3=6 mg/L) MIB (O3=3 mg/L) Geosmin (O3=3 mg/L)

Ozonation in SRP Water (HO radicals more important than O3)

Laboratory Experiments (Task 4, Continued)

Effectiveness of biocides

Copper Chlorine

Effectiveness of surface coatings

Time 2 h 4 h 6 h

Cu2+ (mg/L): 0 0.03 0.1 0.3 Effect of Cu 2+ on the viability of Pseudoanabaena sp.

Average chlorophyll a measurements Over Time (Paints & Alphacoat)

• 20

20 40 60 80 100 120 140

Time(weeks) Chlorophyll a mg/m2

Controls Alphacoat EP2000

3 4

Laboratory tests

Fixed Surface Biocides Hold Promise as a Permanent Canal Treatment

EP2000 TiO2 paint coatings evaluated with field apparatus Canal Coupon Testing Prototype Apparatus

2 4 6 8 10

EP2000 Control

Chl-a Biomass (mg/m2)

Benefits from Experimentation Laboratory

Identified culprit producer algae Understand relationship between environmental conditions and production of MIB/geosmin in culprit algae Learned that culprit algae differ in tolerance of biocides Powdered Activated Carbon (PAC) types differ in MIB removal effectiveness Specification for PAC should be performance based Nomographs for PAC dosing were developed for WTP use

Field-Scale Experiments (Task 2)

Comparison of PAC types at WTP Effect of canal brushing on algae biomass Effect of canal brushing on MIB/geosmin Comparison of biocide canal coatings on algae biomass

Val Vista WTP

South Canal Pre-Sed RM / Coag / Sed Filter West Train (44 MGD) Pre-Sed RM / Coag / Sed Filter East Train (84 MGD) PAC Day Tank 1 HDB - PAC PAC Day Tank 2 HDB - PAC PAC Day Tank 3 20B - PAC

MIB Removal in WTP

10 - 20 mg/L PAC Dose 10 20 30 40 50 raw intake eff pre-sed eff sed eff filter MIB (ng/L) HDB 20B

East Plant with Norit 20B had higher MIB removal than West Plant with Norit HDB

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 10/3/00 10/4/00 10/5/00 10/6/00 10/7/00 10/8/00 10/9/00 10/10/00 MIB (% removal) East - 20B - am (%) East - 20B - pm (%) West - HDB - am (%) West - HDB - pm (%)

Field-Scale Experiments (Task 2, Continued)

Copper application Effectiveness of copper in reducing canal MIB

Background

Production of MIB and major hotspots in the Arizona Canal

0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0 5 10 15 20 Distance (miles) MIB (ng/L)

∆ MIB: > 30 ng/L 87 FWY Mesa September 2001

20 40 60 80 100 120 2 4 6 8 10 Distance (miles) MIB (ng/L)

Deer Valley Squaw Peak ∆ MIB: > 60 ng/L

before brushing after brushing

Canal Wall Brushing

After

200 400 600 800 1000 Chlorophyll a (mg m

• 2)

Before brushing After brushing

Before

20 40 60 80 100 120 Time (days) Chlorophyll a (mg m-2)

0 1 4 7 14

Increase in periphyton biomass on the canal walls

• ver time following brushing treatment (in August 2000)

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 MIB (ng L-1)

A - before brushing

5 10 15 20 25 Geosmin (ng L-1)

B - before brushing

20 40 60 80 MIB (ng L-1)

• after brushing

S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7

Sampling sites

5 10 15 20 25 Geosmin (ng L-1)

• after brushing

S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7

Sampling sites

Concentration of MIB (A) and geosmin (B) in the canal section Before and after brushing treatment (in August 2000)

Canal Brushing Field Experiments

Short test sections (~10 m) brushed once, twice, or three times One pass brushing removed >80% of periphytic biomass Biomass re-establishes within 2-weeks, but MIB & Geosmin remain low Effective in areas of dense biomass on canal walls No downstream complaints from turbidity spikes Other cities have recently scheduled SRP brushing

Copper Application

20 40 60 80 100 120 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 Distance (miles) MIB (ng/L)

Jul 3

Cu 2+ addition

• n Jul/9-10

29th Ave 51st Ave 19th Ave Central Northern 16th ST 24th ST 7th ST

Decrease in MIB concentration over one month in the Canal section following copper application

Jul 11 Jul 25 Jul 30 Aug 9

Brushing

Positive

• Good at removing algae on walls; 2-3 week effectiveness
• Beneficial for removing dense localized periphyton

Negative

• Operational and scheduling challenges
• Slow (several days to brush several miles)
• Labor intensive

Copper Treatment

Positive

• Easy to schedule (1-3 days)
• Low effort - one operator, 8 hours
• Copper residual for > 5 miles
• Effective at reducing MIB over greater canal reach than brushing

Negative

• Cutrine elevated chlorine demand (switched product)
• Possible development of toxicity resistance
• Possible fish kill at > 0.5 ppm

Canal Treatments

Benefits from Experimentation

Objectively evaluated sources and fate of T&O compounds Methodology to purchase and dose PAC in WTPs has been adopted by Phoenix and other cities Field work quantified effects of canal brushing and copper addition on canal biomass and T&O Several cities have arranged with SRP to treat canals specifically for T&O problems given this studies findings

Presentation Outline

Summary of Research Products Summary of Monitoring Activities Summary of Research Activities Summary of Implementation Activities Overview of Guidance Manual Recommendations & Future Needs Integration for Regional T&O Control

Summary of Implementation

Midcourse Evaluation (Task 6)

Purpose: To evaluate technical, economic, and political issues for potential multiple-barrier T&O control options

Phased-In Implementation (Task 7)

Purpose: To implementation measures expected to cause a measurable decrease in T&O causing compounds and an improvement in the taste of the water provided to consumers in a significant portion of Phoenix’s water supply system

Multiple Barrier Approach for T&O Management

• 1. Watershed 2. Reservoirs 3. Canals

4.Treatment plants

• 5. Distribution

system Consumers

Summary Specific T&O control measures

Practice Technical Economic Legal/ instit. Watershed nutrient control * ? ? Source water selection Stepped-up production at Union Hills **** *** *** Modified CAP flow regime **** *** ***** Blending at Cross- connect **** ** **

Summary of T&O control measures (cont’d)

Practice Technical Economic Lega/inst. Reservoir treatment Copper sulfate ** ** **** Destratification ** ** ? Canal treatment Mechanical cleaning *** **** **** Copper sulfate ** **** **** PAC treatment **** ** **** Ozonation **** ** **** Algae maintenance in WTPs * *** ****

Quantifying Benefits Gained through T&O Control

A new concept developed: Consumer Days Below T&O Threshold (CDBT) Goals for CDBT-10 and CDBT-20 ng/L evaluated CDBT can be used to compare and evaluate T&O Implementation activities

Presentation Outline

Summary of Research Products Summary of Monitoring Activities Summary of Research Activities Summary of Implementation Activities Overview of Guidance Manual Recommendations & Future Needs Integration for Regional T&O Control

Summary of Implementation

Midcourse Evaluation (Task 6)

Purpose: To evaluate technical, economic, and political issues for potential multiple-barrier T&O control options

Phased-In Implementation (Task 7)

Purpose: To implementation measures expected to cause a measurable decrease in T&O causing compounds and an improvement in the taste of the water provided to consumers in a significant portion of Phoenix’s water supply system

Implementation Activities Undertaken

Process Control Monitoring (Critical!) with rapid information dissemination Modification of Lake Pleasant: hypolimnion release (UofA recommendation) CAP water by-passing Lake Pleasant Wadell Canal (No Lk Pleasant Release) Blending CAP and SRP water at Granite Reef Switching water production to different WTPs with lower influent T&O levels Copper application in Arizona Canal Mechanical brushing in Arizona Canal PAC addition in WTPs

Was Implementation Successful?

Implementation activities added 100 to 130 million CDBT- 20 This is a 33% to 44% increase over prior years without implementation CDBT-10 was also increased

51 74 81 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 1999 2000 2001 CDBT-20/total consumer days, %

What Implementation Activities had largest Impact in 2001?

• A. MIB < 20

CDs > 20 7% < 20 w/o management 64% PAC 9%

• L. Pleasant
• peration.

0% Source switching 20%

(Partially due to canal treatments)

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Distance (miles) MIB (ng/L) MIB (9/20) MIB (9/27)

87 FWY Mesa Pima Scottsdale 44th ST 24th ST Central 24th Ave 67th Ave

Process Control Monitoring Identifies “hot spots”, serves as basis for PAC dosing, and MIB forecasts

Canal Activities reduce Raw Water MIB

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 30 40 Distance (miles) MIB (ng/L) MIB 7/18 MIB 7/3 MIB 7/25 MIB 7/30 MIB 8/1 MIB 8/9

29th Ave 51st Ave 67th Ave 19th Ave Central 24h ST 44th ST R13 Pima Scottsdale Mesa 87 Highway

Copper applied July 9th and 10 Brushing conducted July 24, August 1

What Implementation Activities had largest Impact in 2001?

• B. MIB < 10

CDs > 10 27% < 10 w/o management 48% PAC 1%

• L. Pleasant
• peration.

7% Source switching 17%

PAC did not reduce MIB to < 10 ng/L due to (1) PAC feed capabilities, and (2) Source switching reduced need for PAC

(Partially due to canal treatments)

Squaw Peak Summer 2001 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 8/1/01 8/15/01 8/29/01 9/12/01 9/26/01 10/10/01 10/24/01 11/7/01 MIB, ng/L SP-IN SP-OUT

PAC in Squaw Peak

MIB, ng/L In, % Out, % < 10 0.0 6.7 < 15 0.0 20.0 <20 0.0 33.3 Summary

Ran out PAC

• Process control monitoring
• CAP-Lake Pleasant operation
• CAP-SRP blending ()
• Source switching with WTPs
• Canal management ()
• PAC treatment in WTPs ()

Cumulatively – multiple barrier implementation activities jointly lead to significant T&O level reductions for Phoenix customers (Mesa, Peoria, Glendale also had benefits)

SUMMARY

What works? What doesn’t? What needs improvement?

= excellent; cost-effective; proven; widely effective

• = very good; demonstrated effectiveness; widely effective
• = good; may have greater potential
• = fair; contributes at times

() = could work better with development

Presentation Outline

Summary of Research Products Summary of Monitoring Activities Summary of Research Activities Summary of Implementation Activities Overview of Guidance Manual Recommendations & Future Needs Integration for Regional T&O Control

Reducing 2 Reducing 2-Methylisoborneol (MIB) and Geosmin in the Metropolitan Methylisoborneol (MIB) and Geosmin in the Metropolitan-Phoenix Phoenix Area Water Supply Area Water Supply A Cooperative Research and Implementation Program by A Cooperative Research and Implementation Program by Arizona State University Arizona State University City of Phoenix City of Phoenix Salt River Project Salt River Project Central Arizona Project Central Arizona Project July 2002 July 2002

Guidance Manual

Taste and Odor Control for Water Supplies in Arid Regions

• 1. Introduction
• 2. Background on T&O Problems
• 3. Multiple Barrier Controls
• 4. Monitoring Programs
• 5. Specific Management Barriers
• 6. Program Assessment
• 7. Case Studies

Introduction

Historical Perspective Seasonal customer complaints Established flavor profile analysis panels Treated canals Applied Powdered Activated Carbon at WTPs Effectiveness of treatment largely unknown

Underpinning Principles for Study

A Multiple Barrier Concept Continuous Monitoring Rapid Response System Broad Collaboration Sustainable Program

Implementation Goals for T&O Control Program

Comprehensive system monitoring to detect T&O compounds Managing water resources to minimize T&O compounds in raw water Optimizing treatment practices in canals Optimizing water production at WTPs receiving higher quality water Optimizing MIB/geosmin removal

Background on Taste & Odor Problems

Biological source of taste & odor compounds Frequency and distribution of taste &

• dor episodes

Seasonal patterns Frequency of problems

Origin of taste & odor compounds

Reservoirs Arizona Canal Water treatment plants

Multiple Barrier Strategy

Reservoir Management

Lake Pleasant Depth of Release CAP Water Supplementation/Substitution

Canal Treatments SRP-CAP Blending Source Switching Among WTPs In-Plant Treatment

Monitoring and Prediction

Sampling Locations Sampling Frequency Recommended parameters to Monitor

MIB, Geosmin (cyclocitral) Temperature Dissolved oxygen Specific Conductance Nitrate Algae

Prediction of T&O Problems

Temperature Nitrate Specific Conductance Algae Types

Benefits of Monitoring and Prediction

Some T&O episodes can be prevented Some T&O episodes can be avoided Some T&O episodes can be treated

Rapid Response System

Intensive Monitoring

Weekly along canals Monthly or bimonthly in reservoirs

Electronic Communication

T&O Newsletter T&O website

Flow Chart of the Rapid Response System

Canals an d water treatm en t plants sam pled (10 t o 20 locati ons) Day 1 G C /MS analysis Day 2 Data and recom m endations to W S D operators and s taff via T&O Newsletter (e-m ail) Operation s m odifie d Day 4 Inter pretati on o f results an d recom m endations Day 3 Questio ns a nd f eedb ack fr om W S D staff

Specific Management Barriers

Water Supply Operations

Lake Pleasant Options SRP-CAP Blending

Management of Canals

Copper Treatment Canal Wall Brushing Biocide Coating

Water Treatment Plant

Source Switching Prevent In-Plant Production PAC Application AC Filter Caps or GAC Adsorbers Advanced Oxidation

Program Assessment

Communications/Feedback

Taste and Odor Newsletter Semi-Annual Workshops

Technical Evaluation

Metrics For Consumer Satisfaction Operational Issues Economic and Political Review

Case Studies

#1 – High MIB In Saguaro Lake #2 – High MIB in Arizona Canal #3 – High MIB in treatment plant influent water

Benefit of Guidance Manual

Tool for T&O Management

Outline integrated strategies for minimizing T&O episodes Useful in detection of T&O compounds Useful in identifying “culprit” algae Recommends sampling sites and intervals Establishes a protocol for communication and response to T&O problems

Interactive Taxonomic Guide

Presentation Outline

Summary of Research Products Summary of Monitoring Activities Summary of Research Activities Summary of Implementation Activities Overview of Guidance Manual Recommendations & Future Needs Integration for Regional T&O Control

Regional T&O Implementation

One unified process control sampling program with rapid turnaround Monitoring lakes with SRP provides MIB forecasts, since lakes are major sources of MIB in late fall Provides long-term unified database to evaluate drought, normal, wet years and impacts of disturbances (fires) Canal treatment costs could be shared by utilities Canal treatment costs are less than PAC PAC bid selection and appropriate dosing is critical; PAC costs have decreased regionally in part due to improved performance-based specifications One entity should manage and communicate T&O information

Presentation Outline

Summary of Research Products Summary of Monitoring Activities Summary of Research Activities Summary of Implementation Activities Overview of Guidance Manual Recommendations & Future Needs Integration for Regional T&O Control

Recommendations

Upstream T&O control is more cost-effective than PAC addition Shift water production to up-canal WTPs In-plant T&O control is necessary, GAC adsorption is recommended over PAC (achieves DOC and T&O removal) ~50% of DBPs leaving the plant formed before entering clearwell (improve DOC removal using GAC and delay point of chlorination) Continue in-plant algae control (copper recommended) Wet years could produce higher T&O levels due to nutrient stimulation of algae and flushing of damp soils Process control monitoring, rapid data turnaround, and empowering WTP staff to USE T&O data is critical

Future Initiatives

Watershed scale:

Continue monitoring to learn what happens during periods of increased rainfall (DOC and T&O) Assess impacts of Salt River watershed fires (contrast against Verde River) (DOC and T&O) Affect of changing salt ion balance on stimulation of MIB or Geosmin production

Canals:

Implement genetic monitoring for culprit algae as part of Early Detection program Apply EP2000 biocide coating to 10-20 m sections of Arizona Canal and monitor for 1 year Use canal coupon prototype device to investigate algae colonization and impacts of algacides

Water Treatment Plants:

Ongoing AWWARF project on O3-Biofiltration Interest in GAC filter caps Use kinetic models to optimize PAC dosing Evaluate fate of algal biotoxins during water treatment

Acknowledgments

Financial Support: City of Phoenix Reducing Taste and Odor and Other Algae-Related Problems for Surface Water Supplies in Arid Environments Salt River Project Central Arizona Project Water Treatment Plant Supervisors and staff Randy Gottler, Jennifer Calles, Alice Brawley-Chesworth Walid Alsmadi, Bob Hollander, Matt Palenica Cities of Tempe, Chandler, Scottsdale, Gilbert, Glendale

Taste and Odor Website http://ceaspub.eas.asu.edu/pwest/tasteandodor.htm