eco/Tech Sludge Recycling System (SRS) - NEIWPCC · e c o / T e c h S R S e c o / T e c h S R S The...
Transcript of eco/Tech Sludge Recycling System (SRS) - NEIWPCC · e c o / T e c h S R S e c o / T e c h S R S The...
eco/Tech Sludge Recycling System (SRS)
NEIWPCC – FOG ConferenceConcord, NH & Sturbridge, MA
February 15-16, 2005
eco/
Tech
SR
Sec
o/Te
ch S
RS
eco/
Tech
SR
S The eco/Tech Sludge Recycling System: A Local FOG Disposal Alternative
♦Introduction♦Sludge Recycling System (SRS)
Operations and Maintenance♦Air Emission Test Results♦Market Conditions and Challenges♦Design Enhancements♦Summary
eco/
Tech
SR
Sec
o/Te
ch S
RS
eco/
Tech
SR
S Introduction
♦Biosolids and FOG♦SRS Development♦SRS Modules
eco/
Tech
SR
Sec
o/Te
ch S
RS
eco/
Tech
SR
S Biosolids and FOG
♦Definitions♦U.S.Generation♦Disposal Methods♦An Opportunity
eco/
Tech
SR
Sec
o/Te
ch S
RS
eco/
Tech
SR
S Definition
♦“Biosolids, historically known as sewer sludge, are the solid organic matter produced from private or community waste water treatment processes….”
US EPA, September 1999
eco/
Tech
SR
Sec
o/Te
ch S
RS
eco/
Tech
SR
S Definition
♦Fats, Oils and Grease -Commonly knows as FOG, is the by-product of cooking. Domestic and commercial sources are: meat fats, lard, cooking oil, shortening, butter, food scraps, sauces and dairy products. Industrial sources include the manufacturing of ice cream, soy products, food flavorings and food processing.
WEF Publication “Fat Free Sewers”
eco/
Tech
SR
Sec
o/Te
ch S
RS
eco/
Tech
SR
S U.S. Generation
♦8 million dry tons of biosolids
♦Restaurant yellow and brown grease– 25 pounds/person/year
in metropolitan areas♦Other sources♦Growing faster than
population
eco/
Tech
SR
Sec
o/Te
ch S
RS
eco/
Tech
SR
S Sludge and FOG Disposal Methods
♦Land Application♦Compost♦Landfill Cover♦Burned♦Burial in Land Fill♦Surface Disposal♦Rendered♦Conversion to Bio-Fuel
eco/
Tech
SR
Sec
o/Te
ch S
RS
eco/
Tech
SR
S An Opportunity
♦A New Disposal Option♦Producer Benefits♦SRS Owner Benefits
eco/
Tech
SR
Sec
o/Te
ch S
RS
eco/
Tech
SR
S SRS Development
♦Heat Balance of Combustion System♦R&D at eco’s Pittsfield RRF
eco/
Tech
SR
Sec
o/Te
ch S
RS
eco/
Tech
SR
S SRS Development (Cont’d.)
♦Installed at eco’s Agawam, Massachusetts Facility
♦Start-up was April 2002
eco/
Tech
SR
Sec
o/Te
ch S
RS
eco/
Tech
SR
S SRS Modules
♦Transportation♦Receiving & Mixing♦Injection ♦Controls
eco/
Tech
SR
Sec
o/Te
ch S
RS
eco/
Tech
SR
S Transportation Module
♦High Solids Tanker♦Commercial Tanker
eco/
Tech
SR
Sec
o/Te
ch S
RS
eco/
Tech
SR
S Receiving & Mixing Module
♦Unloading Area
eco/
Tech
SR
Sec
o/Te
ch S
RS
eco/
Tech
SR
S Receiving & Mixing Module (Cont’d.)
♦Preparation Equipment
eco/
Tech
SR
Sec
o/Te
ch S
RS
eco/
Tech
SR
S Receiving & Mixing Module (Cont’d.)
♦Storage
eco/
Tech
SR
Sec
o/Te
ch S
RS
eco/
Tech
SR
S Receiving & Mixing Module (Cont’d.)
♦Odor Control
eco/
Tech
SR
Sec
o/Te
ch S
RS
eco/
Tech
SR
S Basketball Hall of Fame
eco/
Tech
SR
Sec
o/Te
ch S
RS
eco/
Tech
SR
S Injection Module
♦Injection Pump♦Rack♦Injector
eco/
Tech
SR
Sec
o/Te
ch S
RS
eco/
Tech
SR
S Controls
♦Integrated into Distributed Control System
♦User Friendly
eco/
Tech
SR
Sec
o/Te
ch S
RS
eco/
Tech
SR
S SRS Operations History
♦Volume Combusted
♦Sludge Types
eco/
Tech
SR
Sec
o/Te
ch S
RS
eco/
Tech
SR
S Volume Combusted
♦Over 12,000,000 gallons♦Over 2,800 dry tons♦Trend: Higher solids – Less water♦More volatile content
eco/
Tech
SR
Sec
o/Te
ch S
RS
eco/
Tech
SR
S Sludge Types
Sludge Type Percent Solids BTU/Lb (dry)
W aste Activat ed (W AS) 2- 10% 8,400W AS with Pr imary Skimmings 3% 9,500Digested Sludge 19% 4,500
FOG (ice cream) 13 - 30% 13,700FOG (soy) 4% 8,000Paper M ill 10% 6,500
Textile Mill 7% 10,000
C oal Pile S lurry 20% 14,300Food Flavors 8% 7,000
eco/
Tech
SR
Sec
o/Te
ch S
RS
eco/
Tech
SR
S SRS Maintenance History
♦Reliability vs. Expectations
♦Cost per Ton
eco/
Tech
SR
Sec
o/Te
ch S
RS
eco/
Tech
SR
S Reliability vs. Expectations
♦Pumping Equipment♦Tanks – Level Detectors
eco/
Tech
SR
Sec
o/Te
ch S
RS
eco/
Tech
SR
S Reliability vs. Expectations (Cont’d.)
♦Carbon System Limitations♦Rack Components
eco/
Tech
SR
Sec
o/Te
ch S
RS
eco/
Tech
SR
S Reliability vs. Expectations (Cont’d.)
♦Nozzle♦Balance of Plant
eco/
Tech
SR
Sec
o/Te
ch S
RS
eco/
Tech
SR
S O&M Cost per Dry Ton
2002 Actual 2003 Actual 2004 Actual
Labor $39,900 $49,400 $46,900
Contracted Lab Fees $8,700 $6,400 $7,300
Parts $22,100 $23,700 $30,900
Dry Tons Processed 1,149 1,158 1,714
Cost/Dry Ton w/o Labor $27 $26 $22
eco/
Tech
SR
Sec
o/Te
ch S
RS
eco/
Tech
SR
S Air Emissions
♦Pioneer Valley RRF Air Pollution Control
♦21H Tests♦Results – Excellent!
eco/
Tech
SR
Sec
o/Te
ch S
RS
eco/
Tech
SR
S Results – Excellent!
♦PM10 down 80%♦NOx down 10%♦SOx no change♦Multiple Metals &
Dioxins -insignificant changes
eco/
Tech
SR
Sec
o/Te
ch S
RS
eco/
Tech
SR
S Market Conditions and Challenges
♦Solids Level– WAS
♦Industrial FOGs♦Yellow & Brown Grease
eco/
Tech
SR
Sec
o/Te
ch S
RS
eco/
Tech
SR
S Design Enhancements
♦Nozzle and Retractor♦Next Generation Odor Control♦Level Sensors♦Equipment for Unloading and Storing
Grease Waste♦Controls♦Next Site…
eco/
Tech
SR
Sec
o/Te
ch S
RS
eco/
Tech
SR
S Design Enhancements (cont’d.)
Pittsfield Resource Recovery Facility
eco/
Tech
SR
Sec
o/Te
ch S
RS
eco/
Tech
SR
S Summary
♦Co-Combustion Commercially Proven♦Documented NOx and PM10 Reduction♦Local, Competitive Cost Disposal for
Non-hazardous Liquid Wastes♦Protective of Employees Health &
Safety
eco/
Tech
SR
Sec
o/Te
ch S
RS
eco/
Tech
SR
SPresented by: Edward P. Champagne
Project Manager
eco/Technologies, LLC
An Company
(518) 434-1227
DLM