Said Abou Abdallah, Terry Keep and Dr. Dean ReynoldsOhio AWWA
September 20, 2012
The City of Alliance's Solution for Taste and Odor Treatment
2
WATER STRESS IN AN
INTERCONNECTED WATER SUPPLY
Sources of contaminants in our water supply:
- Industrial discharge
- Agricultural runoff
- Chemical releases
- Municipal Wastewater
InjectionWell
ExtractionWell
Nutrients increase in Algae Blooms Taste & Odour, Algal Toxins
3
EXAMPLES OF MICROPOLLUTANTS
Nitrosamines (e.g. NDMA) Disinfection byproducts
Pesticides & Herbicides Metaldehyde, Atrazine, Isoproturon, others
Petroleum Additives Including MTBE
Pharmaceuticals & Personal Care Products Includes potential endocrine disruptors
Taste & Odour CompoundsSeasonal occurrences of MIB, geosmin and others
Algal ToxinsChronic and acute effects from cyanobacteria-derived toxins
4
TASTE & ODOUR, ALGAL TOXINS
Seasonal algae blooms occur in surface waters
Decaying algae blooms result in MIB, geosmin, algal toxins, other T&O compounds
Earthy/musty, fishy, swampy, grassy tastes & odours at low ppt concentrations
Difficult to remove with conventional technologies
T&O episodes compromise public confidence in the safety of the water
5
COMPOUNDS GENERATED BY SOME CYANOBACTERIA
Geosmin
2-Methylisoborneol (MIB)
GSM and MIB can be detected by sensitive individual down to 4 ng/L (ppt)
[Geosmin] have been measured > 3000 ng/L
Aesthetics: T&O cmpds
Cylindrospermopsin (CYN)
Microcystin-LR (MC-LR) [MC]~1800ug/L meas drng bloom
Public Health: Cyanotoxins
WHO s
et li
mit
at 1
µg/L
USEPA a
dded C
NTX to
the
CCL
6
TASTE AND ODOUR TREATMENT STRATEGIES
• Potassium Permanganate– Limited Effectiveness
• Powdered Activated Carbon– Messy PAC & Sludge Handling, no Performance Guarantee
• Granular Activated Carbon– Frequent & Expensive Change-outs, no Performance Guarantee
• Ozone– Complicated System & Carcinogenic by-product (Bromate)
• UV-Oxidation– Simple, Effective for T&O with Simultaneous Disinfection,
Guaranteed Performance for life of system
7
UV / H2O2 FOR TASTE AND ODOUR TREATMENT
UV Advanced Oxidation: Using UV and Hydrogen Peroxide to destroy trace organic contaminants in water by:
UV-Photolysis
UV-Oxidation
8
UV-PHOTOLYSIS
Chemical bonds arebroken by UV light
9
UV-OXIDATION
Hydrogen peroxide
Hydroxylradical
Chemical bonds arebroken by hydroxyl radicals
Planning and Engineering Approach to the Final Design
11
Planning and Engineering Approach to the Final Design
o UV Oxidation System Feasibility Studyo UV Oxidation System Procuremento UV Oxidation System Final Design Documentso Design Criteria:
• UVT 92%
• Turbidity < 0.06 NTU
• TOC < 3 mg/l
• Nitrates < 1 mg/l
• pH 6.7 – 6.9
• Average Flow 5.5 MGD/10.0 MGD Max
12
UV Oxidation System Feasibility Study
• Actual Costs of using Powered Activated Carbon (PAC)
• UV Oxidation Process
• Electrical Costs
• Hydrogen Peroxide Cost
• Chlorination Cost
• Equipment Manufacturer's Variations
• Design Requirements
• Non-Cost factors
13
UV Oxidation System Feasibility Study
• PAC (Powder Activated Carbon) System Capabilities and Limitations
• Type of PAC used
• Impact on Other Treatment Processes
• Operational Difficulties
• Future Limitations
14
Actual PAC CostsMonthDays/Month
Average Influent MIB Concentration
Flow PAC Cost / MG / day PAC Cost
June, 2010 30 125.53 3.2 $27.76 $2,665.23
July, 2010 31 86.50 3.7 $14.82 $1,700.29
August, 2010 31 23.07 3.5 $17.50 $1,899.18
September, 2010 30 25.90 3.4 $14.89 $1,519.20
October, 2010 31 112.33 3.2 $131.74 $13,068.90
November, 2010 30 326.63 3.0 $422.42 $38,017.41
December, 2010 31 549.46 3.2 $559.86 $55,538.10
January, 2011 31 967.06 3.3 $521.49 $53,348.20
February, 2011 28 911.53 3.3 $535.70 $49,498.78
March, 2011 31 125.67 3.2 $513.44 $50,933.69
April, 2011 30 11.05 3.2 $72.31 $6,941.88
May, 2011 31 4.65 3.7 $22.18 $2,544.50
12 Months Total $277,675.37
Actual Costs of PAC Treatment
15
PAC Actual vs. UV Ox ProjectionsMonth and YearAverage Influent
MIB ConcentrationAverage Flow
(MGD)Actual PAC Costs
Projected PAC/UV Ox Costs
June, 2010 125.53 3.2 $2,665.23 $2,665.23
July, 2010 86.50 3.7 $1,700.29 $1,700.29
August, 2010 23.07 3.5 $1,899.18 $1,899.18
September, 2010 25.90 3.4 $1,519.20 $1,519.20
October, 2010 112.33 3.2 $13,068.90 $13,068.90
November, 2010 326.63 3.0 $38,017.41 $27,000.00
December, 2010 549.46 3.2 $55,538.10 $48,087.57
January, 2011 967.06 3.3 $53,348.20 $57,364.10
February, 2011 911.53 3.3 $49,498.78 $52,469.39
March, 2011 125.67 3.2 $50,933.69 $29,760.00
April, 2011 11.05 3.2 $6,941.88 $6,941.88
May, 2011 4.65 3.7 $2,544.50 $2,544.50
12 Months Total $277,675.37 $245,020.24
PAC Actual vs. UV Ox Projected
16
MIB Concentration vs. PAC and UV Ox
17
UV Oxidation System Feasibility Study: Findings
• Procurement Recommendations for UV Oxidation System
• Capital Costs and Operation & Maintenance Costs
• Non-Cost Factors (Vendor Experience)
• Impact on Water Users – Water rate, water quality
• Schedule of Implementation
18
UV Oxidation System Procurement• Traditional Design vs. Pre-selection
• Variations with Manufacturer’s Designs
• UV Oxidation Equipment Essential and Critical for Taste and Odor
• UV Oxidation Equipment Represents Significant Project Cost
• Multiple Available Strategies
• Balancing Qualifications/Experience and Costs
• Early Procurement Prevents Duplications and Delays
19
UV Oxidation System Procurement: Key Considerations
• Tight Procurement Documents
• Scope of Equipment
• Warranty
• Proposal Information
• Operating Parameters
• Capital Cost Analysis vs. Present Worth Analysis
• Bidding Conditions
• Decision Analysis and
Weighting
20
UV Oxidation System: Procurement • Bid items
• Clear and specific
• Bid Requirements
• Financial Stability
• Experience and Past Performance
• Demonstration of successful Operations
• Equipment Service and Support
• Equipment Characteristics and Flexibility
• Future Capacity
• Operations and Complexity
21
UV Oxidation System: Procurement
• Cost Factors:
• Capital Cost
• O&M Cost
• Common Cost Parameters
• Energy Cost
• Chemical Cost
• Interest rates
• PW period
22
UV Oxidation System: Effective Integration of Quality and Cost
• Designed to meet the Client and Project Goals
• Balanced between Cost and Non-Cost Factors
• Qualifications/Experience Emphasis
• Broad Spectrum of Evaluation
23
UV Oxidation System:Final Design Documents
• Design Documents to Allow the Installation of the Procured Equipment
• UV Oxidation Units
• Hydrogen Peroxide Feed and Storage System
• Chlorine Feed System
• Future Provisions
• Performance Testing
24
UV Oxidation System:Final Design Documents
• Two 30-Inch Diameter Reactor in Series
• Cooling System for Use During Filter Backwash Operations
• Operator Input During Chlorine Trouble Times
• Dedicated Automatic Chlorinator for UV Ox Operation
• System Bypass During Non- Taste and Odor Season
25
UV Oxidation System:Final Design Documents
• Hydrogen Peroxide System
• One 3,000 Gallon Hydrogen Peroxide Bulk Storage Tank
• Two Day tanks with Duplex Feed pump System
• Double Containment Piping
• Chlorine Feed System Capacity Upgrade
• New Chlorine Evaporator
• Dedicated Chlorinator for UV Ox
• Use of Liquid Chlorine with Back-up Gas Manifolds
• Re-training of personnel on use of new Chlorine System
26
UV Oxidation System:Final Design Documents
• Future Chloramination
• Provisions for Feed System
• Provisions for Multiple Monitoring Locations
• Implementation Schedule
• Construction Project Bidding in September/October 2012
• Construction NTP November 2012
• Substantial Completion September 20132013
• Performance Testing by December 2013
SWIFT ECT 16L30” UV Reactor
30” Reactor
On line UV Transmittance Monitor
28
QUESTIONS?
Terry KeepECT Sales ManagerTrojan Technologies
Said AbouAbdallah, PE | Associate Vice PresidentMalcolm Pirnie | The Water Division of ARCADIS216.781.6177 said.abouabdallah @arcadis-us.com