DEAMMONIFICATION TECHNOLOGY FOR NITROGEN REMOVAL: IS THAT THE RIGHT TECHNOLOGY FOR YOU?

DR. TING LU AND JIM FITZPATRICK

Jun

e 2

4, 2

01

5

• Introduction

• Case studies

• Conclusions

OUTLINE

2

June 24, 2015

DEAMMONIFICATION

3

• Conventional

Conventional N-removal consumes a lot of oxygen and chemicals.

CONVENTIONAL NITROGEN REMOVAL

NO2-

O2

(25%)

O2

(75%)

NO3-

AOB

N2

COD

(40%)

Heterotrophs

NH4+

NO2-

NOB

Heterotrophs

COD

(60%)

Aerobic Anoxic O2 COD

4

June 24, 2015

• Conventional

Deammonification: A two step process but occurring in one stage

DEAMMONIFICATION

NO2-

O2

(25%)

O2

(40%)

NO3-

AOB

N2

COD

(40%)

Heterotrophs

NH4+

NO2-

NOB

Heterotrophs

COD

(60%)

Aerobic Anoxic O2

N2 + NO3-

Anammox

89% 11% COD

(0%) NH4+

55%

45%

5

• Less O2 consumption (-60%)

•No COD consumption (-100%)

• Less sludge production

June 24, 2015

Total WWTP Energy Use

60 % Energy Used For Aeration

50 % Aeration For Nitrification

10-20 % N Load From Sidestream

Anammox Is 60 % More Aeration Energy Efficient

Than Conventional

MAIN DRIVERS FOR ANAMMOX TECHNOLOGY

6

Total WWTP Energy saving of approx. 2-4 %

Main Drivers for anammox are: 1. To reduce or eliminate external organic carbon 2. To reduce effluent N in a small footprint

June 24, 2015

Anammox grows very well in centrate Startup range: w/ seed: 1-2 months w/o seed: > 6 months

• Exponential growth of installations (>100 installations to date)

• Extremely slow cell growth rate (doubling time of 10 days)

• Biomass retention is critical

• Optimal temperature = 25 – 35 oC

• Various control complexity

• Timed intermittent aeration

• DO and pH feedback control

• NO2-, NO3

-, and NH3 feedback control

BACKGROUND ON THE ANAMMOX PROCESS

7

June 24, 2015

Anammox bacteria can be enriched successfully in anaerobic digester centrate

Anaerobic Digestion Centrifugation

Side Stream Treatment with Anammox

Primary Sludge

Waste Activated Sludge

June 24, 2015 8

• AOB: Aerobic process

•Anammox: Anaerobic process

Syn

the

tic

Car

rie

r W

all

June 24, 2015

SBR + Cyclone e.g. DEMON®

Media e.g. ANITA™ MOX

Granular e.g. Anammox®

REACTOR TYPES AND TECHNOLOGIES

10

Flow Through e.g. SHARON (NH3N O2 only)

SBR e.g. Cleargreen™

June 24, 2015

Aeration Blowers (coarse

bubble diffusers)

ANAMMOX TECHNOLOGY COMPONENTS

11

Physical layout

Carrier media

Cyclone (granules)

Anammox sludge (fast startup)

Supplemental mixing

Decanter (SBR)

Screens (media)

June 24, 2015

Full Scale Installations

Rotterdam, NL Hattingen, DE Strass, AU

Volume 70m3 * 320m3 500m3

Loading 750 kg-N/day (10.7 kg-N/m3/day)

120 kg-N/day (0.38 kg-N/m3/day)

340 kg-N/day (0.68 kg/m3/day)

Nitrogen Removal Efficiency

80% 70% 86%

Configuration Two Stage (Upstream Partial Nitrification )

Single Stage (Nitrification/Anammox achieved by intermittent aeration)

Single Stage (Nitrification/Anammox achieved by intermittent aeration)

Biomass Granular Biofilm on Kaldnes Media

Granular

*Volume for nitritation not included

June 24, 2015

CASE STUDIES

13

• Cincinnati, OH • St. Joseph, MO • Washington DC

MILL CREEK WWTP, MSD CINCINNATI

14

MSDGC • Serves 230,000 residential

and commercial users, and 250 industrial users

Mill Creek WWTP • Peak flow: 430 mgd

through primary and final disinfection

• Secondary: up to 240 mgd design flow

• Fluid bed incineration: ~100 dry ton per day

June 24, 2015

Rumpke leachate is highly variable, and high organic and ammonia loads

MAJOR INDUSTRIAL WASTE: RUMPKE LANDFILL LEACHATE

15

Flow TCOD SCOD NH4-N pH Ca Temp

MGD (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (°C)

Regular

leachate

Avg. 0.1 4,226 1,988 650 8.5 100 25

Min 1,290 1,110 140 7.6 85 15

Max 20,600 4,900 1,460 10.6 140 29

High

strength

leachate

Avg. 0.2 65,000 60,000 1,932 6.9 3,200 30

Min 49,000 35,500 1,434 5.4 2,667 28

Max 105,000 95,000 3,500 7.1 3,570 38

June 24, 2015

Industrial Load

• highly variable

• High loads

• Very odorous

• Discharges to big interceptor

WWTP

• Instability

• Consumes energy

• Odor control

• Challenge during CSO events

• Potential new WWTP

Finding an alternative treatment for leachate is very important

CHALLENGES ON LEACHATE TREATMENT

16

June 24, 2015

PILOT PROJECT OBJECTIVE

17

• Whether leachate can be treated by the Deammonification technology

Treatability

• Identify inhibition from the leachate to the Deammonification process

Inhibition

• How stable/reliable the Deammonification process is

Stability/Reliability

Jan 14, 2014| Lu| Leachate Pilot Project June 24, 2015

Regular leachate:

• AnitaTM Mox

• Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor (MBBR)

• Integrated Fixed Film Activated Sludge (IFAS)

• Nitrite shunt

High strength leachate:

• Anaerobic Member Bioreactor (AnMBR)

• Upflow anaerobic sludge blanket (UASB) + AnitaTM Mox

BIOLOGICAL PROCESSES WE PILOTED

18

June 24, 2015

Maintain the right microbial structure!

PILOT PROJECT MBBR FLOW SCHEMATICS

19

Anita Mox stage

• AOB & Anammox

• Nitrogen removal

C-stage

• Heterotrophic bacteria

• COD removal

Jan 14, 2014| Lu| Leachate Pilot Project June 24, 2015

ACTUAL SYSTEM LAYOUT AT THE PLANT

20

C-Stage C-Clarifier A-Clarifier Train 1 Anita-Mox Reactor

Train 2 Anita-Mox Reactor

June 24, 2015

C-STAGE AND ANITA™ MOX REACTOR

21

Jan 14, 2014| Lu| Leachate Pilot Project

*Seeded media is from Denver with AOB and Anammox to treat sidestream centarte

C-stage

Reactor

C-stage

Clarifier

Anita Mox

Reactor

Anita Mox

Clarifier

Reactor Volume, Liter 5.0 5.0 7.0 5.0

Media Volume, Liter 2.0 0 3.0 0

Media surface area, m2 1.6 0 2.4 0

pH control N/A N/A 6.7-7.3 N/A

DO target (mg/L) Mixing N/A 1-2 N/A

Return sludge flow (RAS) NA 0 NA 100% - 500% of

influent

June 24, 2015

• How does C-stage coupling with Anita Mox process work?

Expectations:

• C-stage: removes majority of biodegradable COD

• A-stage: removes majority of TIN < 100 mg/L

PROCESS EVALUATION

June 24, 2015

22

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

6/17 6/24 7/1 7/8 7/15 7/22 7/29 8/5

CO

D C

on

cen

trat

ion

, mg/

L

MBBR Phase – COD Profiles

Feed - Total CODC-stage Eff sol. CODAnita Mox Eff sol. COD

Majority of the COD was removed by C-stage. 23

June 24, 2015

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

6/17 6/24 7/1 7/8 7/15 7/22 7/29 8/5

NH

4-N

Co

nce

ntr

atio

n, m

g/L

MBBR - Ammonia Profiles

InfluentC-stage EffAnita Mox Eff

After July 7th, Anita Mox removed majority of the ammonia instead of C-stage 24

Nitritation or AOB was under control after July 7.

June 24, 2015

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

6/17 6/24 7/1 7/8 7/15 7/22 7/29 8/5

Tota

l In

org

anic

Nit

roge

n C

on

cen

trat

ion

, mg

/L

MBBR - TIN Profiles

Influent

C-stage Eff

Anita Mox Eff

The majority of influent TIN was removed in the Anita Mox stage after July 9. 25

Nitritation or AOB was under control after July 7.

June 24, 2015

PILOT PROJECT CONCLUSION

26

• It can be used to treat regular landfill leachate

• Seeded media from centrate was able to adapt to treat leachate

Treatability

• There are inhibitions from leachate that leads to a lower SRR.

Inhibition

• Biofilm medium is very reliable and robust to respond to toxic conditions (i.e. nitrite build up)

Stability/Reliability

Jan 14, 2014| Lu| Leachate Pilot Project June 24, 2015

*Hollowed et al (2013) "Evaluation of the Anita-Mox Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor Process for Sidestream Deammonification at the Robert W. Hite Treatment Facility, Denver Colorado". Water Environment Federatio Nutrient Removal & Removery Conference. 2013, Vancouver, Canada. **Nicholas Smal, Michael Liu, Robert Morton (2014) "Pilot-scale Evaluation of Anita Mox for Centrate nitrogen Removal at the JWPC". California Water Environment Association (CWEA) annual conference, 2014.

ANITA™ MOX DESIGN CRITERIA

27

Jan 14, 2014| Lu| Leachate Pilot Project

CINCINNATI DENVER* LA**

Feed Regular Leachate Centrate Centrate

Medium Originated from Denver

REMOVAL (%)

SRR (g/m2/day)

SRR (g/m2/day)

SRR (g/m2/day)

COD 80 15 N/A N/A

TIN 82 1.1 2.5 2

June 24, 2015

CITY OF ST. JOSEPH, MO.

28

Industrial users are key Contributors to City’s WPF

• Industrial Community is the Life Blood of the City of St. Joseph

• Changes to the NPDES permit for ammonia by MDNR have placed challenging burdens on the dedicated industrial community

• Meetings with Industries

• Key parameters include

• BOD

• Ammonia

• Flow

BACKGROUND

29

June 24, 2015

New Approaches to Save both Industrial and City Rate payers

• To assist dedicated industrial users in meeting the new limits St. Joseph Public Works has implemented a technical assistance program

• Goal of program to provide innovative approaches to allow industrial users to increase production as well as meet new regulations

• Provide opportunity for pilot of new technologies and approaches

GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

30

Domestic

Dedicated 1

Dedicated 2

Dedicated 3

Influent Ammonia Loading = 8000 ppd – Permit = 3800 ppd

June 24, 2015

• Connect high ammonia loads from dedicated industrial users and anaerobic digesters

• City currently has two unused secondary anaerobic digester tanks

• Existing anaerobic tanks are equipped with mixing and heating capacity.

• Provide Alkalinity addition for higher removals

FUTURE CONCEPT

31

Domestic

Dedicated 1

Dedicated 2

Dedicated 3

Permit Ammonia loading = 3800 ppd Anammox treatment – 3200 ppd Compliance can be achieved

June 24, 2015

• Anammox alternatives to consider

• ANITA-Mox Process

• DEMON® Process

• Three bench scale ANITA-Mox type MBBRs were tested:

• Reactor #1: Mixed Reactor: 45% Dedicated user 1, 45% Dedicated user 2 and 10% anaerobically digester sludge supernatant from main WWTP

• Reactor #2: Dedicated User 1 – Slaughter house processing wastewater

• Reactor #3: Dedicated User 2– tannery wastewater

ST JOSEPH ANAMMOX PILOT CASE STUDY

June 24, 2015

32

Performance determined through NH3 and Alk testing

• Reactor operational conditions:

• Pre-colonized media from NYC nit/anammox pilot = 0.25m2/reactor

• 1-2 day hydraulic retention time (2 L reactor volume)

• Single stage continuous/ intermittent aeration

• 30-35 oC

ST. JOSEPH LAB SCALE NIT/ANAMMOX MBBR PILOT CASE STUDY

33

June 24, 2015

• At an average temp of 30oC (±0.8) the reactor performed at:

• Average ammonia removal efficiency = 70% (± 23)

• Average removal rate of 1.5 g/m2-d (± 0.7)

ANAMMOX MBBR PILOT: MIXED WASTEWATER

34

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

12

/27

/12

1/6

/13

1/1

6/1

3

1/2

6/1

3

2/5

/13

2/1

5/1

3

2/2

5/1

3

Alk

alin

ity

mg

CaC

O3

/L

NH

3 C

on

cetr

atio

n ,

mgN

/L

Anammox Pilot: Mixed WW

Influent NH3 Effluent NH3 Effluent Alkalinity

June 24, 2015

• Temperature dropped to 22oC during: 1/11/13 – 1/24/13

• At an average temp of 34 oC (± 1.7) the reactor performed at:

• Average ammonia removal efficiency = 86% (±0.14)

• Average removal rate = 0.71g/m2 –d (±0.24)

ANAMMOX MBBR PILOT: DEDICTATED 1 USER WASTEWATER

35

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

12

/27

/12

1/6

/13

1/1

6/1

3

1/2

6/1

3

2/5

/13

2/1

5/1

3

2/2

5/1

3

Alk

alin

ity,

mg

CaC

O3

/L

NH

3 C

on

cetr

atio

n ,

mgN

/L

Anammox Pilot: Triumph Foods WW

Influent NH3 Effluent NH3 Effluent Alkalinity

June 24, 2015

• At an average temp of 33 oC (± 0.7) the reactor performed at:

• Average ammonia removal efficiency = 30% (± 12)

• Average removal rate of 1.1 g/m2-d (± 0.22)

ANAMMOX MBBR PILOT: DEDICATED USER 2 WASTEWATER

36

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

1/2

/13

1/1

2/1

3

1/2

2/1

3

2/1

/13

2/1

1/1

3

2/2

1/1

3

Alk

alin

ity,

mg

CaC

O3

/L

NH

3 C

on

cetr

atio

n ,

mgN

/L

Anammox Pilot: NBL WW

Influent NH3 Effluent NH3 Effluent Alkalinity

June 24, 2015

SCHEMATIC FOR TREATMENT SYSTEM AT ST. JOE

37

Dedicated User 2

Dedicated User 1

Effluent

June 24, 2015

• Installed at a Dedicated industrial user

• Start up challenges (Snow)

• Initial results show 70 percent ammonia removal

DEMON FULL SCALE DEMONSTRATION

38

June 24, 2015

• Anammox initial cost range from $2 to $7 million

• Equipment cost – $8 to 10 million

• Preliminary construction cost $10 to 15 million

• Conventional MLE - $34 – 40 million

INITIAL ESTIMATED COSTS

39

PRELIMINARY ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED June 24,

2015

BLUE PLAINS WWTP WASHINGTON DC

40

B&V DESIGNING BLUE PLAINS WWTP FILTRATE TREATMENT FACILITY:

DEMON ® PROCESS

41

June 24, 2015

• Anammox installation in the US designed to:

• Treat 1 MGD from liquid stream filtrate from sludge processing facility

• Removal rate: 27,340 lb-N/day

• Schedule:

• Design to be completed by late 2013

• Final completion date in 2016

• Estimate of Probable Construction Cost

• $ 47-53 Million

BLUE PLAINS WWTP ANAMMOX: DEMON ® PROCESS

42

June 24, 2015

CONCLUSIONS

43

Regulation requirement

Influent characteristics: C:N ratio

Side stream treatment process

Space constraints

Potential toxicity or inhibition

Temperature

The aeration/mixing system

IS DEAMMONIFICATION THE RIGHT TECHNOLOGY FOR YOU?

44

June 24, 2015

Dr. Ting Lu |513-609-7459

lut@bv.com

Jim Fitzpatrick|913-458-3695

FitzpatrickJD@BV.com