Bio-P Removal

Bio- Removal-- Principles

p
and examples in MI and
elsewhere

S. Joh Kang, Ph.D., P.E.

Tetra Tech
Tech, Inc
Inc.
Ann Arbor, MI
2010
Presentation Outline

„ Optimization of Chemicals and Energy

„ Bio--P Removal - Review
Bio
„ E
Examplesl – MI and d elsewhere
l h
„ Energy : self sufficiency in the U.S.
„ Summary
Why are we talking
about Bio-
Bio-P at MWEA?

„ 25 years track records in MI-

MI- we
started it in the cold region
„ S t i bl system-
Sustainable system
t - minimal
i i l life
lif cycle
l
costs: energy, chemicals, and sludge

„ Save jobs
Reality
y Check-
Check- how much
are we spending?
„ At 5 MGD Plant in MI
– Chemicals $70,000
– Chemical Sludge disposal $20,000-
$20,000-
30,000
,
– Electricity $200,000
$200,000-- $250,000
„ 7 – 8 Cents //KW-
/KW-Hr,, average
g
„ Peak demand charge

„ Your mileage may vary

Phosphorus Removal

„ Phosphorus removal in a WWTP is

typically
yp y a combination of BPR and
CPR
„ The goal is to incorporate influent TP
into cell mass for BPR
„ The goal is to precipitate residual
soluble P with alum or ferric into a
settleable solids
How Much can we save
from Optimization?

„ Electrical : 15 to 25% to begin with

„ Chemicals : Most of them, but it
depends on wastewater characteristics
of your plant
„ Sl d : ditto
Sludge ditt
 Process Overview

Preliminary
Treatment Filter
Clarifier
Raw
Influent
Biological
Process
Disinfection

Solids
Handling
Final
Effluent
How do y you do Remove
P biologically?
„ Cultivate Phosphorus Accumulating
g (
Organisms(PAO) )
– Need carbon substrate-
substrate- VFA
– Time to grow them
– No oxygen environment
ƒ P can be 4 – 6 % of cell biomass
compared to 1 to 1.5% by weight
Design
g Considerations-
Considerations- wastewater
characteristics

„ Waste Characteristics : past and future

– CBOD5
– TSS - VSS
– TN / TKN
– TP - Ortho
Ortho-- P
– Alkalinity - Volatile acids
– pH
– COD - readily
dil biodegradable
bi d d bl COD
To meet 1 mg/l
g/ TP by
y
BPR, we need VFA
parameters Minimum

COD: TP 40-45

BOD: TP 20

rb COD: TP 10- 16

VFA:TP 4 16
4-16
Volatile Fatty acids
VFA P Update/VFA COD % in Wastewater

Acetic Acid 0.37 60

Propionic 0.10 30

Butyric 0.12 10 for the rest

isobutyric 0.14 “

Valeric 0.15 “

Isovaleric 0.24 “
Sources of Volatile Fatty
Acids : we need 15-
15-20
mg/l
g/
„ Sewers – the longer, the better
„ In--Plant Recycles :
In
thickeners/anaerobic digesters/holding
tanks
„ Fermentation of primary sludge or RAS
at the plant in new tanks – a 2nd
choice
„ C
Commercial i l sources-
sources- a 3rd choice
h i
IF y
you do not have
enough VFA, two options
„ Retrofit existing thickeners or other
tanks
„ Build a new fermenter
Fermenter for Primary
Sludge
HRT : 6
6-- 12 hours
SRT : 4 – 8 days

„ 0.3 g VFA/g
/g solids
„ 0.06 – 1.5 g VFA/total solids on COD
Temperature

„ Pontiac, MI
„ Genesee County
County, MI
Secondary Release-
Release-
causes and their
p
prevention
„ Low pH
„ Chemical toxicity
„ Excess anaerobic respiration/digestion
„ Long SRT
„ Nitrate in anaerobic
b zone
„ Excessive sludge blanket
D.O. Control : manual vs.
automatic control

„ At Significant energy savings

– Aerobic Conditions
„ 2.0 mg/L
„ as low as 1.0 mg/L at peak conditions

– Anoxic Conditions
„ D.O. “No”
„ Nitrates “Yes”
– Anaerobic Conditions
„ D.O. “No”
„ Nitrates “No”
BPR Design

„ Design to include an anaerobic zone

„ Design
g HRT for anaerobic zone usuallyy
ranges from 0.5 hours to 1.5 hours
„ DO and NOx must be exhausted to work
„ Baffling is a common design technique
„ Anaerobic zone is almost always
y the first
process basin to maximize VFAs in the raw
influent
Retrofit Examples in MI

„ Pontiac, MI-
MI- First Cold Weather
Demonstration in 1984-
1984-6
„ Genesee County, MI: Best BPR plant
w/o chemical or filter
„ Kalamazoo, MI : under construction,
2010
A/O
/ Process: Anaerobic &
aerobic zones

1 hr HRT 5 hr HRT
Genesee Co.,, MI,, 20 MGD,, AS/Land
Application of Biosolids

Primary
g
Settling BPR Clarifier

Lime
Stabilization
Storage Biosolids Land
Application
 Genesee County
100.0000
Raw Influent
mean = 4.45 mg/L
st. dev = 0.66 mg/L
10.0000 COV = 15%
hosphorus, mg/L
L

Primary Effluent
mean = 3.71 mg/L
1.0000 st. dev = 0.63 mg/L
COV = 17%
Total Ph

Final Effluent
0.1000 mean = 0.26 mg/L
st. dev = 0.068 mg/L
g
COV = 26%

0.0100

0.05 1 2 5 10 20 30 50 70 80 90 95 98 99.5 99.95

Percent Less Than or Equal To

Raw Influent Primary Effluent Final Effluent

 10

9
7
Phosphorus, mg/L
L

1 6
4
3

5
2
Total P

8
10
0.1

0.01
0.05 0.1 0.5 1 2 5 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 95 98 99 99.5 99.9 99.95
Percent Less Than or Equal To

1 - Step Feed w/ Fermenter-Piscataway, MD 6- Five-stage Bardenpho-Northeast, Clearwater, FL

2 - EBPR w/ VFA Addn + Filters-Kalispell, MT 7 - Denitrification Filters + Chem Addn-Johnston Co., NC
3 - Five-stage Bardenpho-Marshall St., Clearwater, FL 8 - A/O--Genesee Co., MI
4 - A2O with VFA, chemical, and filter-Durham, OR 9 - Phased Isolation Ditch-North Cary, NC
5 - Westbank--Kelowna, BC 10 - Triple sludges---Western Branch, MD.

Medium-Level Phosphorous Removal Plants

 10

1
sphorus, mg/L

6
5

0.1
Total Phos

4 2
3
0.01 1

0.001
0.05 0.1 0.5 1 2 5 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 95 98 99 99.5 99.9 99.95
Percent Less Than or Equal To
1 - Chem Addn + Tert Clarifiers + Land Application-Brighton, MI
2 - Biofor, DensaDeg, and MBR-Breckenridge, CO (only Ann. Ave. and Max Month available)
3 - MBR-Lone Treek Creek, CO
4 - 5 Stage Bardenpho w chemical and filter, Pinery, CO
5 - Tert Clarifier + Chem Addn + Filter-McMinnville, OR
6 - MBR + Chem Addn-Hyrum, UT
7-Denite filter Lee County, FL

Low Level Phosphorus Removal Plants

 Brighton,
g , MI,, 1.3 MGD,, OD/Filter/Land
Application

FeCl3
Slow
FeCl3 Sand
Filt
Filter Land
Application
Oxidation
Ditch
Clarifier
Claricone
Finall
Fi
Effluent
 Typical
yp Energy
gy Usage
g in
U.S. WWTPs
„ Average Plant : 1500 KWh/Million Gallons
(MG) treated for secondary treatment
„ Advanced Treatment Plant: 2000 – 3000
/ G
KWh/MG
Where do we use
electricity?
Is Energy
gy Self-
Self-Sufficiency
y
Feasible in the U.S.?

„ Proven in concept and practice in

Strass, Austria, a 10 MGD plant
Strass, Austria WWTP
3500000
Power Generated > Power Used
3000000

2500000
year

2000000
kW-hr/y

1500000

1000000

500000

0
92

93

94

95
96

97

98

99

00

01

02
03

04

05
19

19

19

19
19

19

19

19

20

20

20
20

20

20
Power Used Power Generated

Wett, Buchauer, and Fimml, Asian Water Conference, 2007

Technical Features at
Strass
„ Two-stage biological process to
Two-
transfer maximum amount of organic
g
matter from liquid phase to solid
p
phase
„ On--line control of aeration
On
„ New CHP equipment: 38% efficiency
in power generation
„ Sid -stream
Side-
Side t ttreatment
t t
Comparison
p of U.S. to
Strass: Usage
„ Per-person water usage is twice in the U.S.
Per-
„ Per--person energy usage is higher than that of
Per
St
Strass d to:
due t
– Traditional U.S. practices in design and operation
– Increased mixing g power
p needs
– Increased pumping power needs
„ Strass is more aggressive at optimization than
t i l US practice
typical ti
Roadmap p to Self-
Self-
Sufficiency
100
BNR-optimization

Side-Stream Treatment

Automatic Controls and HVAC

On-Line Sensors
50 Min
Ratio
3:1 Swing Zones

Turndown Capabilities

Anaerobic Digestion/Co-Digestion
Commitment, Regulations,
g Incentives and Training
g
0
Feasibility Study and Technology Innovation and Demonstration
Bio--gas Facts
Bio

„ Average PE generates wastewater at

100 gpd
gp
„ Approx. 1 cubic foot of digester
gas/d/PE via anaerobic digestion
„ 600 BTU/c.f.

„ 100kW off electricity

l t i it from
f 4.5
4 5 MGD
plant
Optimization
p at y
your
plant?
„ Feasibility study
„ Monitoring of wastewater – influent
and in-
in-plant recycles
„ Energy analysis and contracts w/utility
„ Development of alternatives : Energy,
Ch i l Sludge
Chemical, Sl d
„ Funding – Local or Pay as you go from
savings
„ Implementation
Pilot Demonstration?

„ Take one train and test

„ Convert a thickener on site
„ Other tanks
Summary (1)

„ Bio Phosphorus removal is proven,

reliable,, and efficient with fermenter.
fermenter.
– VFA is neeed from the wastewater or
fermenter
– PAO has specific needs to grow
– Fermenter
e e te des
design
g has
as improved
p o ed
„ Energy Optimization is a way to keep
the funds at the city
Summary(2)

„ BPR - meet the permit

„ Saves chemical
chemical, energy and sludge
management costs
„ Environmentally sustainable operation
„ Quality of Life is enhanced
„ Saves jobs