Download - WRF Webcast Integrated Treatment Process Management · PDF filecollaboratively to develop practices that achieve ... and filter backwash management to ... Beneficial synergies of co-locating

© 2017 Water Research Foundation. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.© 2017 Water Research Foundation. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. No part of this presentation may be copied, reproduced, or otherwise utilized without permission.

WRF Webcast

Integrated Treatment Process Management for Drinking Water and Wastewater Treatment

Operations

June 1, 2017

© 2017 Water Research Foundation. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.© 2017 Water Research Foundation. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

Housekeeping Items

• Download the slides • Q&A• Post-event Survey• Webcast On-Demand

© 2017 Water Research Foundation. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

Today’s Schedule• WRF’s One Water Mission• What Is ITPM?• What Might ITPM Look Like?• Opinions and Experiences with ITPM• Research Development Workshop and

Outcomes• Conclusions • Q&A


Moderator

Leanne Miller, P.E. Water Research Foundation


WRF’s One Water Strategy

One Water Research Agenda will fund

research to support the drinking water,

wastewater, and stormwater industries.


Erin Mackey, Ph.D., P.E.Principal Investigator

Brown and Caldwell

Wendy Broley, P.E.Co-Principal Investigator

Brown and Caldwell

Peter BongWater/Wastewater

SuperintendentCentennial Water and

Sanitation District


Erin Mackey Ph.D., P.E. Brown and Caldwell


What Is ITPM?1


Integrated Treatment Process Management (ITPM)

is a holistic approach to water management through

which water management agencies work

collaboratively to develop practices that achieve

treatment objectives in a way that minimizes

overall cost and maximizes environmental, water

body, and watershed quality benefits, while

protecting public health.


ITPM Takes One Water to the Next Level

01What is ITPM?


• Goals and efficiencies of looking at water and wastewater systems operation together— Energy savings— Fewer waste-processing systems— Better management of variable flows— Cost savings and/or improved

operations by optimizing chemical selection and dosing

Benefits of Integrating Water and Wastewater Treatment Processes

©hydxl/Shutterstock

7

01What Is ITPM?


“Discussions are underway between our water and wastewater utility on how to share assets and infrastructure so that we can become more efficient and cost-effective to our customer base.”

“[Our utility] sends our WTP residuals…to the WWTP. It is dewatered together, and is land applied.”

Over 50% of Respondents Report Practice of ITPM

Opinions and Experiences with ITPM

56%44%

Practices ITPM

Does not practice ITPM

03

Over 50% of Respondents Plan to Implement More ITPM in the Future


Investigation of ITPM Practices2


Opportunities to Integrate Treatment Processes

What Might ITPM Look Like?

3

2

1Integrating the processing of water treatment plant residuals and wastewater sludge

Selecting chemical treatment practices that optimize water and wastewater operations and costs

Water treatment plant RO concentrate and filter backwash management to minimize impacts on wastewater treatment processes

Although there are examples of ITPM occurring at select utilities across the country,

ITPM research is still an emerging field, most notably showing potential benefits in

three areas.

4

02


Co-processing May Enhance Treatment Efficiency and Reduce Processing Costs

~15% of U.S. municipalities co-manage water and wastewater solids including:• San Francisco

• Chicago

• Indianapolis

• Milwaukee

• Philadelphia

• Nashville

• Metropolitan Water Districtof Southern California

• Betasso WTP

• Centennial Water andSanitation District

6

02What Might ITPM Look Like?


• Potential impacts of co-processing — Iron toxicity in activated sludge

— Precipitation of phosphorus

— Prevention of oxygen transfer in biofilms

• Case study: 75th Street WWTP in Boulder, CO— Issues led to setting a maximum

acceptable iron concentration in WTR

Effects of Co-processing on Biological Activity

14



• Over 50% expressed interest in pursuing co-processing

• 89% of respondents noted co-processing needs more research including:— Regulatory implications— Implementation barriers

Most Respondents Identified Co-processing of WTP Residuals and WWTP Sludge as an

Area of Interest

03

Opinions and Experiences with ITPM

©RotaryKilnChina


Effects of Co-land Application of WTR and Biosolids

• Co-land application as an alternative to co-processing

• Limits on heavy metals and nutrients content

• Improved phosphorous absorption of the soil

• Reduction in phosphorous in runoff and leachate

16



• Anticorrosion and scale-forming chemical additions

• Chemical additions at desalination facilities

• Alkalinity and pH-adjusting chemical additions

• Water treatment coagulant additions

Chemical Treatment Optimization

22



• BMPs vary by water quality and location characteristics

• Sewer disposal options depend on downstream capacity

WTP Concentrate and Filter Backwash Management

29



Peter Bong Centennial Water and Sanitation District


Case Study // Centennial Water and Sanitation District

Source: Google Earth 2016

03Opinions and Experiences with ITPM

Overview of CWSD Community of 100k people

near Denver, CO Provide Water and

Wastewater service 30 MGD Surface Water Plant 9 MGD Ground Water Plants 8.5 MGD Wastewater Plant




WTP residuals sent to the WWTP• Ferric Sulfate and PAC Sludge• Sent by gravity via SS• Becomes part of the biosolids

that are land applied • 20 Wet Tons of Biosolids per day

Winter• 30 Wet Tons of Biosolids per day

Summer




Positives of co-processing• One location for dewatering and hauling• Lower disposal costs• Improved primary clarifier removal efficiency 69% TSS removal without residuals 31% BOD removal without residuals 83% TSS removal with residuals 47% BOD removal with residuals




Positives of co-processing (continued)• Reduced BOD load results in less air demand in

the activated sludge basins• Improved copper removal• Improved primary sludge density• Improved odor at the Primary Clarifiers




Positives of co-processing (continued)• Increased methane production due to BOD/carbon

capture and diversion to digesters. 10 to 20 % increase, still monitoring

• Foaming in anaerobic digester reduction Initial testing shows a increase in pH when the residuals are

present. Possibly due to PAC limiting the volatile acid formation.

• Struvite formation in the digesters/centrate is minimized




Negatives of co-processing• Supplemental carbon may be needed in the summer for

biological nutrient removal• Variable BOD removal. May need to change to Chemical

Enhanced Primary Clarification• Iron can be a large percentage of the TSS leaving the

facility, so effluent TSS must be kept low. • TENORM may become an issue in the future• Selenium levels increased when WTP are present




Next Steps:• Continue to monitor

digester foaming to determine control mechanism

• Continue to monitor selenium levels

• Construct CEPCchemical tanks


Wendy Broley, P.E. Brown and Caldwell


Research Development Workshop and Outcomes4


• Explored what’s “out there” in ITPM research and utility practices

• Held a utility workshop to develop concepts for how ITPM research could move forward

WRF Project 4677 Developed a Research Roadmap for ITPM

Research Development Workshop and Outcomes

6

04


• Water professionals from across the country

• Global research themes identified

• Developed draft list of project ideas for the research themes

A Collaborative Workshop Identified ITPM Research Priorities

8

04


• Project problem statements crafted and refined

• Ranked top research priorities

• Determined top five recommended project ideas and objectives for further consideration by the RAC


Four ITPM Research Areas Were Identified

Co-processing of water treatment residuals and wastewater sludge

Chemical optimization between WTPs and WWTPs

Beneficial combined solids reclamation (BCSR)

Concentrate and backwash solids management

10

04


34

2

1


Identified Research Concepts

1. Costs and Opportunities Associated with Co-processing

2. Impacts of Co-processing on Wastewater Processes

3. Co-processing Guidance Document

4. Fate-and-transport evaluation of key constituents resulting from the introduction of WTRs at WWTPs

5. Beneficial synergies of co-locating water and wastewater treatment/water reclamation facilities

6. Impacts of conveying WTRs to collection systems

16

Area 1

Co-processing of WTR and wastewater sludge

04




321

1. Inventory of Chemicals Used in WTPs and Their Potential Impacts on WWTPs

2. Tools for Technical and Economic Analysis of System-Wide Chemical Treatment Optimization

3. Inventory of Chemicals Used in WWTPs and AWPFs and Their Potential Impacts on Water Treatment

16

04


Area 2

Chemical Optimization Between WTPs and WWTPs



321

1. Potential beneficial uses and markets for BCSR

2. P- and nitrogen (N) fixation during land application for biosolids alone, co-processed solids, and comingled solids

3. Impacts on soil microbial composition and activity from co-land application of biosolids alone, co-processed solids, and comingled solids

4. Impacts on greenhouse gases from beneficial use of biosolids alone, co-processed solids, and comingled solids

16

04


Area 3

Beneficial Combined Solids Reclamation

©Ehrman Photographic/Shutterstock



2

1 1. Decision tool for managing WTP waste streams

2. Impact of periodic release of concentrate and backwash from WTPs on wastewater processes, hydraulic loads, and filter-to-waste

16

04


Area 4

Concentrate and Backwash Management


Closing


Conclusions

• ITPM is a largely unexplored area of One Water• We could go in many directions • Best options appear to involve:

— Co-processing of solids— Co-ordinating chemical use

• Local regulations and institutional arrangements are important factors


AcknowledgementsThis work was made possible through financial support of WRF, BC, and

in-kind donations from the following utilities:

• Denver Water • Los Angeles Department of Water

and Power• Northeast Ohio Regional Sewer

District• Padre Dam Municipal Water District• Water Environment & Reuse

Foundation• Washington Suburban Sanitary

Commission

• American Water• Centennial Water and

Sanitation District• City of Columbus Department

of Public Utilities• City of San Diego • Columbia University • DC Water

40


Q&A

Submit questions through the Question Box


Thank You

Comments or Questions

[email protected]@brwncald.com

More Information

www.waterrf.org