Mission “Bioptech is the market leader

in preventing eutrophication thus ensuring access to clean water

and recycling Phosphorusthus securing food supply for a growing population”

Bioptech in the Media – A Novel Solution

Two Urgent, Global Problems

Euthrophication Peak Phosphorus

Consequences & trends

Increasing regulation P-removal Strong need for P-recycling

European Sustainable Phosphorus Platform (ESPP)(http://www.phosphorusplatform.eu/)

1. Worldwide food security

2. No P in Europe3. Eutrophication4. P-crisis affects all – Prices increase5. Call to action on RecyclingBaltic Region Focus

Reactive Filter Beds

• The worlds most efficient P-filter

• Natural mineral - Opoka

• Proven and established - 4 000 small filters installed

• Scientific evidence - 20 years of research

• Ongoing upscaling - Large filter pilots in Sweden and UK

• Own opencast in Poland

• Resource provision & production capacity - 1,000-fold scalability

Unique technology - multitasking – Sustainable

1. One of few concurrent P-removal & recycling technologies

2. Highest P-removal (100 %) on the market

3. Concurrent bacteria & odor removal – strong added value

4. 30 % cheaper than existing technology, chemical precipitation

5. Applicable on all sources of leakage

6. Proven - Simple - Flexible - Scalable

2.Biological

step

Recyclable Reactive Filter Bed

1.Septic tank

3.Reactive Bed

filter

4 000 small filters (< 20 pe) in operation

End-polishing

Water + P + Bacteria Water free from P, bacteria & odorReactive Bed

filter

Principle

In practice

Calcination, Slow P-release,pH-increase, nutrientUptake, better structure

HPO42-

Ca2+

OH-

PO43-Ca3(PO4)2(s)

Filter media based on calcium-silicate (hydrate) material

Dominating P-form in ww

Different forms of Calcium-phosphatescan be created

What happens in the Poloniteduring retention time?

Ca2+ + 2 OH- → Ca (OH)2 , pH decreases

pH:12,0 - 9,0

Background data from e.g.:

Bench-scale column tests: Nilsson, C., .. Renman, G., et al. 2013. Efficacy of reactive mineral-based sorbents for phosphate, bacteria, nitrogen and TOC removal – column experiment in recirculation batch mode. Water Research 47: 5165-5175

Pilot-scale field tests:Renman, A., Renman, G., 2010. Long-term phosphate removal by the calcium-silicate material Polonite in wastewater filtration systems. Chemosphere 79: 659-664.

P-tot:0,1 – 0,3 mg/l

Baltic Sea Eutrophication

90 % Eutrophicated affecting

75 Mn people in 1 500 municipalities in catchment areas

Source: BCG: HELCOM, EUROSTAT

Sources of Nutrient Pollution

90 % Pollution from

Agriculture, Municipal WW, Private WW

A Lack of Awareness!

Source: BCG: Baltic Sea Survey

70% of municipalities not implementing measures to address problems,

25% unaware of critical status of the Baltic Sea!

Helcom Conclusions;”Municipal upgrade & private WWT is a good idea!”

Need• Structured approach to determine cost-effectiveness• Prioritise actions to mitigate nutrient loads• Pilot projects

Key to success• Similar approaches local adaptions – no one size fits them all • Engagement - municipalities, local politicians, local org, companies and citizens

Source: BCG, ”Restoring waters in the Baltic Sea Region”

BSAP P-red. target70%Municipal WWT

Expansion, Upgrade,Adjustment

< -------------------- 30 – 65 % -------------------- >

Small P- Filters

Large P-filters Customized filters

WasteWater Treatment Plants

Single houses, scattered settlements NA NA

Biop®

Municipalities, industries

Farmland, animal farms,Constructed wetlands etc

Modular & scalable applications adressing all needs

Products

Segments

Cost Effective P- Filtration(€/kg P removed)

Bioptech solutions

Phosphorus removed (kg/year)

Cost-efficiency of P-removal(EUR/kg)

Comparison figure(Naturvardverket 2008)(EUR/kg) *

P-filterPrivate HH

3,4 101 215 – 637

Large filter Muni. WWTP

6 803 49 41 – 330

Manure Run-Off filter

500 80 50 – 9735

FarmlandDitch-filter

375 67 50 – 9735

* (Naturvardsverket Report 5877, 2008)

“Traditional” solutions prevail – Need for new solutions

Technique Use Effective

Cost effectiv

e

Less freq.

maint.

Robust Recycling

Min. Mech.

Comment

Infiltration bed40 % ?

Traditional,Does it work?Sand Filtration

Bed (markbädd) 17 % ?Only septic tank

19 % ! Doesn’t work

Storage tank 21 % ? Logistics, CO2

Compact WWTP2 % ?/ ?/ ?/ Chemicals or P-

filterCommunal treatment 1 % ?

Source: Hav och vatten; Svenska MiljöEmissionsData (SMED), SMED Rapport Nr 44 2011.

Septic Tank

Effluent Treated

Water

BIOP – a compact wwtp for private houses

• Compact and light – little digging• Cost Effective• Low Energy Footprint• No chemicals• Good Reduction capabilities:

Technique

Infiltration bed

Sand Filtration Bed (markbädd)

Only septic tank

Storage tank

Compact WWTP

Communal treatment

BOD > 90 %

Phosphorus > 90 %

Ntot > 50 %

A New Solution NeededTechnique Use Effectiv

eCost

effective

Less freq.

maint.

Robust Recycling

Min. Mech.

Comment

Infiltration bed40 % !

Traditional,doesn‘t workSand Filtration

Bed (markbädd) 17 % !Only septic tank

19 % ! Doesn’t work

Storage tank 21 % Doesn’t treat

Compact WWTP2 %

Communal treatment 1 % Expensive

???

SWIM

Small-Scale Wastewater treatment system based on Innovative filter

Materials

Septic Biological pretreatmentw. filtermedia

Horisontal filter w. filter media

SWIM - Concept drawing

SamplingSampling

Gravity Open Flexible Modular Scalable Cost effective

Challenges;- Hydraulics, retention time- Dimensioning filter media- Pre-treatment, BOD- Filter change- Logistics

Polonite & Sorbulite

Project Objectives & Benefits

Nutrient Discharge to water sources

Recycling of Phosphorus

High Efficiency

P: 90 - 100 %N: 50 %Bacteria: 99,9 %BOD: > 90 %

10 % Cheaper acquisition & installation

Carefree & 25 % cheaper maintenance

Open solution instead of black box. Robust

Recycling of 100 % phosphorus

Gravity, modular,Flexible, scalable,min mechanical parts

-> Scientific evidence

1. New installation

Large p-filters, large WWTPBioptech filters as a substitute or complement

Bio WWTP

Bio + Post chem WWTP

Bio + Simultaneous chem WWTP

P tot 0,1 – 0,5 mg/l

4. Sewer overflow filter 5. Reject water

”P-Mining”

3. Upgrade / Complement

2. Substitute

INLET

PUMP

FLOW SWITCH

OUTLET

#1 Retention time 1 h

#2 DRAINING

#3 DRAINED

#4 FILLING

FLOW SWITCH

PUMP

Large P filters – Large WWTPSequenced Batch Processing

Benefits- Cost effective- Simple, flexible, scalable- Low maintenance, corrosion- No sludge- Hygienization- No chem

Competition P-FILTERSP-treatment + P-recycling

Performance

CostEfficiency

High

Low High

Low

Chemicals

Other filter media1. Optimization2. Cost3. Environment?4. No Recycling5. A lot of SLUDGE

Global trends – driving new tech.1. P-treatment legislation2. P-recycling 3. Chemicals reduction

Field

Dual-filter

DitchDam

Ditchfilters - farmland

Filter concept – chicken farm manure runoff

Sand + Sorbulite® filter Polonite®

filter

Inlet

Outlet

Robust - Effective - Life time – Dirty water

Overflow filterCoarse Sorbulite®

Distribution well

Distribution well

Bio/Sedimentation basin

Systems not in right proportion

Estimated filter performance:- Ptot < 0.5 mg/L (80-90 % reduction)- Ntot 50-70 % reduction- BOD7 70-90 % reduction- Bacteria (E.coli and coliforms) 70 - 90 % reduction

PoloniteSuperior Filter Materials

Anders Norénanders.noren@bioptech.se

+46 70-687 87 14