3 aguas residuales

SOME CURRENT TRENDS INWASTEWATER TREATMENT

Part I: Water Treatment

Iñaki del Campo – Director de PropuestasDegremont LATAM

November 2014

2013 2

Trends in Wastewater Treatment Plant

Trends in Water Treatment

1.Optimization of Energy and carbon footprint

2.Compactness and Induced Advantages

3.Micropollutants

4.Reuse of Treated Water

2013 3

Trends in Wastewater Treatment Plant

Trends in Sludge Treatment

1. Combined strategy with water treatmentfor optimization of the energetic potential oforganic matter

2. The final disposal:• Landfilling,• Beneficial use

» Agriculture / Soil application» Energy» Commercial Products

3. Sludge Technologies

2013 4

SUMMARY Trends in Wastewater Treatment Plant

• WATER TREATMENTReduction of Energy Consumption

and Carbon Footprint

Water to (Water and Energy)

• SLUDGE TREATMENTOptimization of “Internal Fuel”

in Sewage Water

Sludge to Energy

Balance between Electrical and Thermal Energy

2013 5

REDUCTION of ELECTRICAL ENERGY CONSUMPTION and BILL

The WWTP of the FUTURE will optimize the use of electrical energy and the relatingcosts …

No real gap at short termbut CUMULATIVE actions on MINOR points (VFDs for instance) and MAJOR points as:

– Aeration of aerobic biological reactors (40 to 60% of the total WWTP consumption)

– Improvement of mixing requirements

– Improvement of ventilation/deodorization

WATER LINE1. Optimization of Energy and Carbon Footprint

2013 6

DESIGN of WWTPs - TWO DIFFERENT WAYS

LA FARFANA – Santiago de Chile1 million m3/d

PARIS – Colombes (France)DWF 240,000 m3/d – WWF 1 million m3/d

WATER LINE2. COMPACTNESS and Induced advantages

No land constraints

Land constraints

2013 7

Panama City – 1 million inhabitants240,000 m3/d

DESIGN of WWTPs - TWO DIFFERENT WAYS

CANNES – French Riviera : 300,000 Inhabitants


2013 8

Compact WWTPs require 2 to 5times less Surface than conventional

ones

Reduction of LandRequirements

& Associated Costs

Reduction of Nuisances(Noise, Odours)

ArchitecturalIntegration

COMPACTNESS

PossibleConstruction of

WWTPsin

City Centers

Significant savingsin Main Interceptors

Nice’s WWTP220,000 m3/d

COMPACTNESS is a FANTASTIC DRIVER for DESIGNOPTIMIZATION

Busan Korea126,000 m3/d

Minimized Operation Cost


2013 9

COMPACT TECHNOLOGIES in water lines*

Huge development of compact technologies in the pastdecades and still evolving for:

Primary sedimentation

Biological treatmentwith activated sludge (suspended growth biomass),

including SBR and MBRwith attached growth biomass (Biofilters, MBBR)

or with mixed processes (IFAS / MBBR)

Rain water treatment

* Sludge treatment is not very surface consuming(except solar drying, composting, …)


2013 10

HYDRAULIC LOADS for PRIMARY SETTLING TANKS… and TERTIARY

Conventional With lamellar Modules*Clarifiers Without coagulants With coagulants

Surface 3 to 5 m3/m2.h 20 m3/m2.h 30 to 100 m3*/m2.h forloading domestic sewagerates depending on theat peak flow application

** storm conditions

* and optimised hydraulics SEDIPAC DENSADEG

DEGREMONT PRODUCTS

3 to 10 times more compact

Sludge recirculation:it improves the flocculation

Thickened sludgeextraction

TreatedwaterRaw

Water

Flocculation:mixing tank: mixing of the polymerplug tank: the flocs become heavier

Clarification:heaviest flocs settlelightest flocs are retained in the lamellae

Coagulation:formation of thesmall flocs

The DENSADEGTM


2013 11

Discontinuous process : Cyclor® : all in one

Clarifier

Biological sequenced treatement :CYCLOR®

+Biological tank

A conventional treatment in one step :Degremont SBR - Cyclor

Continuous process : 2 separated works (biologicaltreatment and clarification)

2013 12

Sequenced Batch Reactor : Cyclor

2013 13

DESIGN : 415 000 PE75 000– 130 000 m3/d

7 200m3/hStart 2011

DESIGN : 415 000 PE75 000– 130 000 m3/d

7 200m3/hStart 2011

Water line Pumping station 12 m3/s with screens Pretreatment 6 m3/s (Grit & Grease)

File 1 (2 m3/s) : Cyclor® (2x4 cells – 2000 m2 each) File 2 (CSO, 4 m3/s) : Densadeg 2D100

Sludge line : GDE

Filter press Incinération with Thermylis Odor removal Azurair C

LE HAVRE - (76, France)

Balance 1/3/13 – 1/11/13

ParameterAverage

Inlet(mg/L)

Average outlet (mg/L)

data Target

TSS 229 5 15

BOD5 211 4 20

TN 49 6.5 10

TP 5.3 0.6 1

One of the 85 Cyclor reference : Le Havre - France

2013 14

Elementsare grouped

incassettes

Fibres areassembled in

elements

Activated sludge is separated from interstitial treated water byULTRAFILTRATION MEMBRANES

- No final sedimentationvery significant surface gain

- High quality of treated waterin SS, Turbidity, Faecal Coliforms,Phosphorus, SDI

- Ideal for Reuse Applications inIrrigation or Combined with DownstreamReverse Osmosis (R.O.) if TDS reductionrequested

MBRBiological Treatment with Activated Sludge

Development of The MEMBRANE BIOREACTORS

Opposite Trends: WATER QUALITY vs CARBON FOOTPRINT


Example: PARIS WWTP / ACHERES – a MBR for 300 MLD

2013 15

A CASE STUDY

Current Status:

A conventional WWTP

Built over 70 years invarious stages

Non integrated in theregion

Odour nuisances

Bad impact onneighbourhood- claims- devaluation of real estate

values

The biggest WWTP in Europe > 2 millions m3/day

GREAT PARIS / ACHERES (North West)

70 m3/s in Storm Conditions


2013 16

The FUTUREApprox. 10 Years of Works

Complete rehabilitation of the site Nuisances ZERO Environmental INTEGRATION COMPLETE RECOVERYof the real estate value in theneighbourhood

A pretreatment passing 70 m3/s(Storm peak)

A biological treatment passing up to2,200 MLD with a peak of 51 m3/s

Biological filtration +MBR for 300 MLD

GREAT PARIS / ACHERES (NORTH WEST)


The largest in the World

2013 17

BIOFORTM

BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT with attached growth biomassRecent Trends:• Biofiltration

a biological reactor with an aerobic / or anoxic biomassattached to a fine granular media 2.7 to 4.5 mmacting as a filterno final clarification


Degrémont BIOFOR

BIOFOR CBIOFOR NBIOFOR DN

2013 18

References in the World are very numerous > 100

BIOFILTRATION: OSLO (Norway)– Built in rock caverns

400,000 m3/d


2013 19

BIOFILTRATION – References in the world are very numerous

DALIAN – China / 120,000 m3/d

XIAMEN – China / 300,000 m3/d


Some in CHINA

2013 20

Another Example: PARIS CENTRAL WWTP(Colombes) - France

•32,400 m² underground•13,000 m² above ground

BOD5 pollution equivalent to 2.2 millioninhabitants in storm conditions.

1,000,000 m3/d in stormconditions

A CASE STUDY WITH STORM WATERTREATMENT


The WWTP

2013 21

COLOMBES WWTP – PARIS’ CENTRAL WWTP

Capacity: 240,000 m3/d in Dryweather

1,035,000 m3/d in Stormconditions

About 1 million Inhabitants

Commissioned in 1998

Ambitious Objectives•Flexible Treatment•Fully urbanized Background•Zero nuisances (odour, noise)•Limitation of space•Fine architectural design

•3 sludge's disposal routes :– Dewatered or ashes– incineration, road and boat


2013 22

MOVING BED BIOREACTORS MBBRMeteor 660 type *

• Protected surface: 660 m²/m3

• Diameter: 12.2 mm• Length: 12.0 mm• Material: HDPE* Two other types existing 450 and 515 m²/m3

METEORas carrier

2 possible ways:

• IFASIntegrated Fixed filmActivated Sludge process

• MBBRMoving Bed BioReactor


2013 23

MBBR Configurations for CARBON and NITROGEN REMOVAL

Dissolved Air Flotation

Microscreening – 10 µ

Other type of microscreening– 10 µ


GREENDAF

COMPACKBLUE D

COMPACKBLUE M

• MBBR— All biological stages C, N, DN with attached growth

biomass on METEOR

Associated with very compact final separation stages— High rate Dissolved Air Flotation (DAF)— Microstraining

2013 24


Some references with METEOR:

– USA:• GROTON (Connecticut) 23,000 m3/d• FALLING CREEK (Virginia) 7,000 m3/d• PROCTORS CREEK (Virginia) 5,000 m3/d• EAST PROVIDENCE (Rhode Island) 54,000 m3/d

– BANGLADESH• DHAKA 474,000 m3/d

MBBR for Nitrification in DW(15-20 mg/L NH4)

2013 25

RAIN WEATHER applications (Combined Sewers)

Many possibilities depending on:

• Hydraulic peak factorsPF 3, 4, 5 … or higher

• Tertiary treatment with Phosphorus precipitation, if any

• Biological treatment of Rain / Storm water or not

• Trend: Environmental Protection 100% of Time


2013 26

SOME CASE STUDIES with Applications

For DENSADEG and BIOFILTERS

• Example of MERU and LIMOGES (France) with TertiaryDensadeg in DWF turned into WWF Settling Tanks

• Example of PARIS / Colombes with Primary Densadegfollowed by BIOFILTERS Treating CARBON in WWFconditions


2013 27

Example : WWTP of Meru

dry weatherrunning

wet weatherrunning

biological treatment

lifting station

DENSADEGCSO 2D 100

biological treatmentlifting station


Tertiary Treatment (P removal)

WWF Clarification

High Velocity *

* At lamellar surface

2013 28

Transition from tertiary to primary CSO

Meru, France October 16th, 2002

DensaDeg® High-Rate Clarifier/Thickener

TSS COD(t) COD(s) BOD5 TKN Total PAvg. Influent mg/l 277.6 325.1 39.2 70.5 17 2.5Avg. Effluent mg/l 21.2 54.7 33 10.5 11.1 0.6

92% 83% 16% 85% 35% 76%

PARAMETERS

PERCENT REMOVAL

Plant Size - 2000 m3/h


75 m3/m².h -

25 m3/m².h -

2013 29

Example : WWTP of Limoges

pretreatment

DENSADEG Tertiary

DENSADEG Tertiary

biological treatment

dry weather runningstormwater treatment

lifting stationwet weather

on standby of a biological line

DENSADEG 2D 100

lifting stationdry weather


High velocity *

* At lamellar surface

2013 30

Example: COLOMBES – PARIS’ Central WWTP

CONFIGURATION with WET WEATHERPeak flow of 1,035,000 m3/d

TN and TP objectives are abandonedTurbocompressors

Pretreatment C.E.P.TBIO 1st BIO 2nd BIO 3rd

FeCl3

Poly

9 Densadeg140 m² Carbon Removal

24 filtersof 104 m²

29 filters of 111 m²

12 filters of 104 m²

BOD5 35 mg/l

SS 30 mg/l


2013 31

MICROPOLLUTANTSMetals, Organic Compounds (pharmaceuticals and personal careproducts, pesticides, industry compounds, solvents andsurfactants, emerging contaminants, …)

very low concentrations (µg/L, ng/L)

but toxic effects on Environment (endocrine disruptors)and on potential drinking water sources (water tables, rivers)

Treated water qualityis adapted

Drinking WaterTP

Town BRIVER

Many Countries practice an indirect recycling for drinking water production

WATER LINE3. EMERGING MICROPOLLUTANTS in Sewage Water

2013 32

• Secondary treatments 75-80% removal (average)*(if SS/BOD5 20-30 mg/L)

• Not sufficient Tertiary or Quaternary treatmentsnecessary (in most of cases)

• Solutions:– Extensive phyto remediation– Adsorption (Active Carbon)– Oxidation (O3 with catalyst) (if necessary)– Membranes (NF or RO)

Possible combinations

Treatments

WATER LINE3. MICROPOLLUTANTS in Sewage Water

* Very variable according to micropollutants family

2013 33

A second life for water

EASY and CHEAP

-All technical tools - Additional costs are generallyare available limited unless Reverse osmosis

is involved for reducing salinity

-Recently UF membranesBrought new prospects

but linked to very regional conditions climate, distance between theWWTP and the end user, …

WATER LINE4. Reuse of Treated Water for Irrigation, Cooling Circuits…

2013 34

CONVENTIONALACTIVATED SLUDGE T.P.

FLOW DIAGRAMS without REVERSE OSMOSIS

M3+

PST SSTAT CoagulationSand

Filtration Disinfection

Ultrafiltration SafetyDisinfection

BOD5 < 20 mg/lSS < 20 mg/lTN < 10 mg/l

SecondaryTreatment

PST MBR SafetyDisinfection

UF MembraneBioreactor

Cl2

Irrigation

Irrigation

DOHA West (Qatar)135 MLD

DOHA Lusail (Qatar)60 MLD

Irrigation

BOD5 < 10 mg/lSS < 5 mg/lTN < 9 mg/l

BOD5 < 5 mg/lSS < 1 mg/lTN < 8-9 mg/l

BOD5 < 5 mg/lSS < 1 mg/lTN < 8-9 mg/l


2013 35

A case study in USA - West Basin (California): 110,000 m3/dCl2

Cl2

Cl2

Cl2

Cl2

Cl2

Cl2

Cl2

CoagulationFlocculation

Disinfection

FiltrationDisinfection

Disinfection

Disinfection

Disinfection

DisinfectionBiofilterBiofor®N

Filter washwaterDensadeg®

RO

RO

RO

RO

UF/MF

UF/MF

Lime Accelator®

Chlorination

Chlorination

Multimedia filter

Title 22IrrigationUrban non potable uses

Refinery :Low pressure boiler

High pressure boiler

Cooling tower

35% 65% MDW

Potable uses :Groundwater recharge

Hyp

erio

n W

TP (L

OS

ANG

ELES

)

22 000 m3/d

28 000m3/d

9 500m3/d

19 000m3/d

56 700m3/d


2013 36

West Basin

Los AngelesAirport

GolfRefinery

Since 1995: 110,000 m3/d

Total capacity expected: 340,000 m3/d

Operated by United Water (Suez Environnement)


2013 37

Compakblue M Compakblue D Aquazur V Greendaf

SeparationOut-in

pile fiber clothmedia filtration

In-outfine woven clothmedia filtration

Down flowsand filtration

(1-1.5m)Dissolved air flotation

P precipitation No No Little (< 0.5 mg P/L) Yes

Velocity (m/h) 250 gTSS/h/m2or 8 m/h

350 gTSS/h/m2or 8 m/h 15 m/h 25 m/h

Global headloss (mWC) 0.7 0.7 2.5 0.7Extracted sludge conc.

(g/L) 0.5 1 0.3 15

TSS outlet (tertiary) 6 mg/L 10 mg/L 5-10 mg/L 10 mg/L

TSS outlet (meteor) 30 mg/L* 30 mg/L* - 15-20 mg/L*

Required footprint (m2)/ m2 filtration area 0.2 0.2 1.6 2

Disc filter : Compackblue serie : alternative to conventional sand filter


3 aguas residuales

Engineering

water treatment iaki

m3d water line

water lines

sewage water sludge

inhabitants water line

optimization of energy

carbon footprint water

m3d compactness