final report covering the project … · 2018-12-20 · final report covering the project...

(Projects funded under the Call 2014 onwards must use this format)

LIFE Project Number

<LIFE14 ENV/ES/000621>

Final Report Covering the project activities from 16/07/20151 to 15/07/2018

Reporting Date2

<15/10/2018>

LIFE PROJECT NAME or Acronym

LIFE RAMSES

Data Project

Project location: Murcia, Spain

Project start date: 16/07/2015

Project end date: 15/07/2018

Total budget: 1,158,391.00 €

EU contribution: 694,906.00 €

(%) of eligible costs: 59.99 %

Data Beneficiary

Name Beneficiary: ACCIONA AGUA, S.A.U.

Contact person: Juan Baron Segarra

Postal address: Avda. De les Garrigues, 22 2ª planta

08820 – El Prat de Llobregat

(Barcelona)

Telephone: (+34) 93 335 15 00

E-mail: [email protected]

Project Website: http://www.life-ramses.com/

1 Project start date 2 Include the reporting date as foreseen in part C2 of Annex II of the Grant Agreement

2

Instructions:

Please refer to the General Conditions annexed to your grant agreement for the contractual

requirements concerning a Mid-term/Final Report.

Both Mid-term and Final Reports shall report on progress from the project start-date. The

Final Report must be submitted to the EASME no later than 3 months after the project end

date.

Please follow the reporting instructions concerning your technical report, deliverables and

financial report that are described in the document “Guidance on how to report on your LIFE

2014-2020 project”, available on the LIFE website at:

http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/toolkit/pmtools/life2014_2020/documents/how_to_report

_on_your_lifeproject.pdf. Please check if you have the latest version of the guidance as it is

regularly updated. Additional guidance concerning deliverables, including the layman’s report

and after-LIFE plan, are given at the end of this reporting template.

Regarding the length of your report, try to adhere to the suggested number of pages while

providing all the required information as described in the guidance per section within this

template.

http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/toolkit/pmtools/life2014_2020/documents/how_to_report_on_your_lifeproject.pdf

http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/toolkit/pmtools/life2014_2020/documents/how_to_report_on_your_lifeproject.pdf

3

Table of contents

1) List of key-words and abbreviations ...................................................................................5

2) Executive Summary ...........................................................................................................6

3) Introduction ........................................................................................................................8

3.1) Description of background, problems and objectives (as foreseen in the proposal) .......8

4) Administrative part ........................................................................................................... 11

5) Technical part ................................................................................................................... 12

5.1) Technical progress, per Action................................................................................... 12

5.1.1) Implementation actions (B) ................................................................................. 12

5.1.2) Monitoring of the impact of the project actions (C) ............................................. 25

5.1.3) Public awareness and dissemination of results (D) .............................................. 31

5.1.4) Project management and monitoring of the project progress (E) .......................... 35

5.2) Main deviations, problems and corrective actions implemented ................................. 37

5.3) Evaluation of project implementation ........................................................................ 38

5.3.1) Methodology applied .......................................................................................... 38

5.3.2) Project implementation evaluation ...................................................................... 38

5.3.3) Effectiveness of the dissemination activities........................................................ 41

5.4) Analysis of benefits ................................................................................................... 43

5.4.1) Environmental benefits ....................................................................................... 43

5.4.2) Economic benefits .............................................................................................. 44

5.4.3) Social benefits .................................................................................................... 44

5.4.4) Replicability, transferability, cooperation ............................................................ 45

5.4.5) Best Practice lessons ........................................................................................... 45

5.4.6) Innovation and demonstration value .................................................................... 45

6) Key Project-level Indicators ............................................................................................. 46

7) Comments on the financial report ....................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

7.1) Summary of Costs Incurred ......................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

7.2) Accounting system ...................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

7.3) Partnership arrangements ............................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.

7.4) Certificate on the financial statement ........................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

4

Index of figures

Figure 1. Main elements of the process ................................................................................. 10 Figure 2. Laboratory level pilot plant .................................................................................... 10

Figure 3. Project chart .......................................................................................................... 11 Figure 4. Simplified scheme of the experimental pilot plant .................................................. 14

Figure 5. Nitrification rate considering both plastic filling with the same protected surface (S

= 500m2/m3) ......................................................................................................................... 15 Figure 6. Construction work ................................................................................................. 20

Figure 7. Final prototype implementation ............................................................................. 20 Figure 8. Biogas production flow and % produced methane .................................................. 22

Figure 9. Performance of elimination of SS at the exit of the RAMSES prototype, before the

biological conventional process ............................................................................................ 26

Figure 10. Performance of elimination of COD at the exit of the RAMSES prototype, before

the biological conventional process ...................................................................................... 26

Figure 11. Methodology for the determination of the COD ................................................... 28 Figure 12. Methane production during the project ................................................................. 30

Figure 13. LIFE RAMSES logo ............................................................................................ 32 Figure 14. Notice board designed for the LIFE RAMSES project ......................................... 33

Figure 15. Webpage designed for the LIFE RAMSES project ............................................... 33 Figure 16. Main information contained in the web page ........................................................ 34

Figure 17. Reference to the LIFE RAMSES Project in the invoices from ACCIONA Agua

............................................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. Figure 18. Reference to the project in the invoices from ESAMUR ...... Error! Bookmark not

defined.

Index of Tables

Table 1. Deliverable list ..........................................................................................................7 Table 2. Milestones list ...........................................................................................................8

Table 3. Project´s objective assessment................................................................................. 10 Table 4. Characteristics of the synthetic water ...................................................................... 14

Table 5. Specifications of the plastic fillings ......................................................................... 14 Table 6. Nitrification rate getting for each plastic filling ....................................................... 15

Table 7. Specifications of the studied plastic fillings. ............................................................ 16 Table 8. Consume of ammonium values for each plastic filling (35% occupation) ................ 16

Table 9. Activity and cost of the studied plastic fillings ........................................................ 16 Table 10. Comparison biogas production with and without so-substrate ................................ 21

Table 11. Comparison biogas production with and without substrate .................................... 21 Table 12. Rate comparison of biogas production among different analysed substrates .......... 22

Table 13. Limit value of concentration of heavy metals in soils and sludge ........................... 23 Table 14. Analytical report results after RAMSES prototype installation .............................. 23

Table 15. Quality requirements for the wastes from waste water treatment urban plants ....... 24 Table 16. Measured parameters of exit water from Blanca´s (WWTP) 2018 ......................... 24

Table 17. Indicators with environmental impact .................................................................... 25 Table 18. Indicators with socioeconomic impact ................................................................... 31

Table 19. Dissemination activities ........................................................................................ 32 Table 20. Programme indicators ........................................................................................... 37

Table 21. Main deviations .................................................................................................... 38

5

Table 22. Project´s actions implementation ........................................................................... 41

Table 23. Project cost incurred................................................ Error! Bookmark not defined. Table 24. Final status of expenditure for ACCIONA Agua ..... Error! Bookmark not defined.

Table 25. Final status of expenditure for ESAMUR ................ Error! Bookmark not defined.

1) List of key-words and abbreviations

Upflow anaerobic sludge blanket, water reuse, wastewater treatment, agricultural reuse

Ammonium nitrogen N-NH4

Biological oxygen demand BOD

Carbon Dioxide CO2

Cellulose triacetate CTA

Chemical oxygen demand COD

Coliform forming units CFU

Concentration C

Dry Matter DM

Flow rate Q

Gas-Liquid Separator GLS

Hydraulic retention time HRT

Hydrogen Sulfide H2S

Spanish Statistical Office INE

Methane CH4

Mixed Liquor Volatile Suspended Solids MLVSS

Nitrate nitrogen N-NO3

Nitrogen N

Organic matter OM

Oxygen Uptake Rate OUR

Phosphate phosphorus P-PO4

Phosphor P

Return on Investment ROI

Royal Decree RD

Solids Retention Time SRT

Specific Oxygen Uptake Rate SOUR

Suspended solids SS

Sulfates SO4

Total Kjeldahl nitrogen TKN

Total Nitrogen TN

Total suspended solids TSS

Upflow anaerobic sludge blanket UASB

Volatile matter VM

Volume of Fluid VOF

Volatile suspended solids VSS

Wastewater treatment plant WWTP

6

2) Executive Summary

The aim of the project LIFE RAMSES is to demonstrate that a process consisting of an

anaerobic digestion using supported biomass growth followed by a biological treatment is able

to enhance the quality of the reclaimed water, thus making possible its reuse for irrigation and

agricultural purposes.

In order to improve the overall sustainability, a co-digestion process using organic residues has

been coupled with the anaerobic reactor so that the biogas production has been improved,

leading to a self-sufficient energy process.

Generally speaking, the project has been a success in terms of know-how obtained for both

ACCIONA Agua and ESAMUR. Although ACCIONA Agua already possess wide experience

in UASB technologies, this is the first time that such an extensive project was carried out. The

knowledge obtained within this project will be very helpful in the widespread implementation

of these novel solutions using a proprietary design of an anaerobic reactor supported by biomass

as pre-treatment of a biological process for urban wastewater treatment. Moreover, the project

has proposed an innovative implementation procedure to gather and store biodegradable

wastes and valorise and distribute the organic sludge.

A complete characterization of feed water has been carried out, paying special attention to

possible seasonal variability. The testing of different plastic supports for biomass growth

were on-going at laboratory scale in The Canary Islands since October 2016, where experts on

this subject have been actively working to carry on this activity. Additionally, some more

necessary material has been purchased.

The analysis of different co-substrates for anaerobic co-digestion process have been

developed and the consortium carried out a successful procedure to manage such co-substrates

from industry. Also a demonstration plant of a significant scalable size was designed and

built. The planned actions, deliverables and milestones were successfully carried out by a

qualified and experienced team from ACCIONA and ESAMUR as shown in the tables below.

.Besides, monitoring actions, indicators and benchmarks were defined to verify the

implementation of the project in terms of expected technical results and socioeconomic impact

(ACCIONA and ESAMUR).

Regarding the dissemination actions, ACCIONA and ESAMUR were involved in various

associations and platforms and have broad experience in the dissemination of project results.

Moreover, detailed information of the project is available in the project web page, including

Technical Publications, Leaflets, Notice Boards, etc.

Finally, several deliverables have been developed within the project in order to report all the

conclusions and results obtained. these deliverables are linked to some milestones that have

been successfully achieved during the lifetime of the project:

7

Name of the Deliverable Number Deadline

Final report about the characterization and waste B3 01/10/2015

Initial inventory about the companies B3 01/10/2015

Communication plan D1 16/10/2015

Project Management Handbook E1 16/10/2015

General communication Leaflets D1 16/01/2016

Functionalities description of the LIFE-RAMSES website D3 31/01/2016

Communication project dossier first year D1 16/07/2016

Report: baseline C1 16/07/2016

Report: socioeconomic baseline C2 16/07/2016

Final report on characterization of Blanca WWTP input water and of

its possible seasonable variations B1 30/07/2016

Final report on calibration of the mathematical model B3 30/08/2016

Basic sizing of prototype B4 31/08/2016

E.3.1. Form programme indicators – MR E3 16/01/2017

Report on the construction of the cogeneration unit and gas line B4 30/03/2017

Report on the prototype implementation B4 30/03/2017

Communication project dossier second year D1 16/07/2017

E.3.2. Form programme indicators – PR E3 16/01/2018

Report on each plastic filling tested (4 months per each filling) B2 28/02/2018

Report on selection of candidates plastic fillings to verify their

behavior B2 28/02/2018

Report of production of biogas and biogas quality for different co-

substrates B5 30/03/2018

Report on the composition of sludge hygienized B5 30/03/2018

Report on the quality of the treated water B5 30/03/2018

Final report of collection, storage and dosage of co-substrate B3 30/06/2018

Communication project dossier third year D1 15/07/2018

E.3.1. After LIFE communication Plan E2 15/07/2018

Layman´s Report

E.3.3. Form programme indicators – FR E3 15/07/2018

E.4.1. Auditing report E4 15/07/2018

Inventory of co-substrates in order of efficiency in the production of

biogas B5 15/07/2018

Manual of energetic optimization of EDAR conventional applying

this technology B5 15/07/2018

Report of operation and production of biogas performance as well as

behavior of the analyzed co-substrates B5 15/07/2018

Report on networking with other projects D5 15/07/2018

Report: Final socioeconomic status C2 15/07/2018

Report: Situation after project implementation C1 15/07/2018

Table 1. Deliverable list

Name of the Milestone Number Deadline

E.1.1. Kick-off meeting E 1 16/09/2015

Enterprises inventory finalized B 3 01/10/2015

Final report on waste B 3 01/10/2015

Project website D 3 31/01/2016

First stage of dissemination D 1 16/07/2016

Calibration of the mathematical model

completed and tested B 3 30/07/2016

Dimensioning of prototype completed B 3 30/07/2016

8

Design of the prototype B 4 31/08/2016

To obtain water characterization B1 30/07/2016

Completion of commissioning work B4 28/02/2017

Completion of construction of the prototype B4 28/02/2017

Validation of plastic filling to use in the reactor B2 28/02/2017

Second stage of dissemination D1 16/07/2017

Correct operation of the prototype B5 28/02/2018

Final report on the verification of every filling tested B2 28/02/2018

Procedure validated and implemented in the EDAR B3 01/06/2018

Correct and stable continuous operation B5 30/06/2018

E.1.2. Positive technical and financial reports E1 15/07/2018

Third stage of dissemination D1 15/07/2018

Table 2. Milestones list

3) Introduction

3.1) Description of background, problems and objectives (as foreseen in

the proposal)

Environmental problem: The amount of available water is less than the demand. Some regions

of the European Union, especially in the Mediterranean area, are characterized by an

unbalanced geographical distribution of water resources. The high growth of urbanization,

irrigation and population increases water stress in countries where consumption has already

reached the resources available. In addition, the volume of wastewater is also increasing

between 6-7% per year in Europe.

In Spain reused water only accounts for a small percentage of the total Spanish water demand,

but in some areas, such as the Canary Islands, Valencia or the Region of Murcia, this percentage

is quite high, meaning that water has become a strategic non-conventional resource.

Specifically, the Region of Murcia leads the national and European outlook on wastewater

treatment and reuse, with state-of-the-art technologies for water treatment that are implemented

in their 97 WWTP. In 2012, the 97 WWTPs treated 109,406,674 m3 of wastewater. The 96 %

of the treated wastewater is reclaimed in an indirect or direct way, being this number the 25 %

of water reuse in Spain.

The situation in Europe differs significantly from that of Murcia. In the European Union, only

1-2% of the potentially reclaimed wastewater is reused. Besides, the necessity of technologies

that enhance the proportion of wastewater to be reused, it is important to consider the amount

of sludge that is produced and its quality, so it can be used as fertiliser. Nowadays only 40% of

the sludge generated by WWTPs has the appropriate quality to be used in agriculture, according

to the Sludge Directive. However, existing sludge technologies are expensive and associated to

negative environmental impact.

In this scenario, it is essential to develop an innovative design in order to improve the

quality of water, to take more advantage of the depurated water and to reduce and reuse

the produced sludge in WWTP´s. This is the reason why the LIFE RAMSES project has been

designed and developed.

9

In this sense, RAMSES technology has generated 30 % less sludge than currently existing

technologies, with lower energy requirements.

To fulfil this objective, several specific objectives were defined. In the next table the state of

the defined objectives is shown by the end of the project:

OBJECTIVES STATE HOW THIS OBJECTIVE

HAS BEEN ACHIEVED

To improve the quality of treated

water, thus increasing the amount of

reclaimed water available for reuse and

reducing the amount that it is

discharged. It was expected that >

90% of the organic matter and

suspended solids of the wastewater are

removed before the biological treatment.

Elimination of 90% environment

and clear improvement of the

effluent output

It has been achieved by reduction

of organic matter and suspension

solids in the incoming flow to the

biological reactor and by

improving the turbidity of the

treated water after improving the

tertiary treatment and improving

the transmittance.

To increase the value of organic

waste coming from nearby industries

so they can be reuse as cosubstrate for

co-digestion.

They have been selected several

co-substrated as suitable for being

use in co-digestion

It has been achieved by using

wastes from nearby industries for

the co-digestion process thus

improving the reutilization of

wastes of the nearby industries.

To reduce CO2 emission since the

biogas produced by co-digestion is used

to cover the energy demand of the

WWTP. Once the co-digestion is

properly optimised, it can even lead to a

self-sufficient plant in terms of energy

consumption

CO2 emissions have been reduced

thanks to the co-digestion process.

Due that the electrical consume of

the WWTP has been reduced in

(365000 Kwh/year – 182500

Kwh/year) = 182 500 Kwh/year.

The reduction of CO2 emission

has been 70262.5 Kg de CO2 eq

To reduce in 30 % the current volume

of sludge produced in the biological

treatment, and to increase the value of

this sludge (actually consider a waste) enabling its reuse as fertiliser due to the

high organic content that it has (it will

content the organic matter removed),

The volume of sludge obtained in

the Blanca´s WWTP has been

reduced up to50%

It has been achieved by

eliminating the input load in the

sludge line and getting to increase

the dryness of the final sludge.

To improve the stability of the

process by means of using supported

biomass growth. In this way, the

supported biomass is highly specific,

resulting in a process which is better

prepared in front of inhibitor events

that could bring the water to be treated.

Plastic fillings were introduced in

the system, tested and checked

whether the process was working

in a more optimal way and getting

less COD values.

It has been achieved by testing

different plastic fillings and

selecting which presented the best

characteristics. Once it has been

selected it has been introduced to

the process so checked that the

process was stabilized.

To decrease in 25 % the volume of the

reactor in newly built facilities, as the

amount of biomass involved in the

process (for the same volume) is

increased and highly specialised. Likewise, the capacity of existing

reactors can be increased, which is very

useful in case the technology is

implemented in existing WWTP, where

space is a critical issue.

Objective reached by the design

of the prototype

It has been achieved by the design

of the prototype to decrease in

25% the volume of the reactor

To transfer the acquired knowledge

to stakeholders by means of specific

education and dissemination strategies

This objective has been achieved,

there has been an extensive

discussion of the project and the

The acquired knowledge

throughout the project has been

shared with farmers, associations

10

and platforms as well as

recommendations to policy makers.

obtained results among all the

interested stakeholders

of irrigators, researchers related to

the water sector, construction

companies and research centres,

customers and public

administrations.

Table 3. Project´s objective assessment

In the next paragraph it is shown how the technology has been carried out.

The technological solution: the solution proposed in RAMSES has been based on the use of

an anaerobic digestion with supported biomass growth as pre-treatment of the biological

treatment of urban wastewater (see figure 1). The anaerobic digestion process has been based

on a UASB reactor but with an specific design developed within the RAMSES project. It has

been fed with organic waste collected from different industries in the area, mainly from canned

food industries. This organic waste acts as co-substrate of the digestion process and is treated

together with the water and incorporated into the co-substrate in order to form a nutrient-rich

organic sludge, which can be used as fertilizer. This process also produces biogas that could be

used in the digestion process, making the overall system more sustainable in term of energy.

Previous experimental work has been performed in order to support the design of the plant by

selecting the optimal conditions of operation and retention time in the reactor. To accomplish

the objectives, a pilot plant was built at laboratory level.

Figure 1. Main elements of the process

Figure 2. Laboratory level pilot plant

11

4) Administrative part

The Management Board was formed and confirmed at the kick-off meeting as the main

project´s decision making responsible. Furthermore, all management activities were

coordinated so as to implement the Project Management process. Since the very beginning, the

partners (ACCIONA Agua and ESAMUR) have monitored this management process with

regular meetings so as to keep track of the tasks ‘progress as well as to plan the following steps.

As a result, the partners have obtained an updated framework of the project implementation,

general progress and next actions.

Each partner has had a specific role in the different actions of the project as shown in the image

below. In the last months of the project, Beatriz Porras from ACCIONA Agua joined team due

to the maternity leave of Paula Pérez.

It is important to highlight that during the project there has been a good communication between

partners, which has enhanced the successful results of the different tasks and actions.

Figure 3. Project chart

The partnership Agreement has been a reference document for all the partners regarding the

management of the project.

To summarize, at the end of the project, there have been no problems with the overall

management of LIFE RAMSES, and significant deviation has not been held from the

arrangement in the partnership agreement.

ACCIONA Agua, as the Coordinating Beneficiary, has had the responsibility of keeping in

contact with the European Commission and the external monitor as well as informing partners

about specific requests and communication to/from European Commission. In this sense,

ACCIONA Agua has been in constant contact with the External Monitor (Itxaso Mora) who

tracks the activities and solves doubts arisen during the project.

Technical team

Technical advisory board (Acciona Agua/ Esamur)

Coordinator

(Acciona Agua)

Paula Pérez Sánchez/Beatriz Porras Rodríguez (E actions)

Amador Rancaño (B and C actions)

Javier Martinez

Yolanda Solano

Sonia Calabuig

Ignasi Jordana

Carlos Rodríguez

Diana Castro

Carlos Lardín

(D actions)

12

5) Technical part

5.1) Technical progress, per Action

5.1.1) Implementation actions (B)

5.1.1.1) Action B1: Parameterization of WWTP feed water characteristics

and its annual variability

Beneficiary responsable: Acciona Agua

Actual schedule

Actual duration 24 Months

Actual start date July 2015

Actual end date July 2017

At the beginning of this action ESAMUR communicated that a new manifold had been

connected to the WWTP apart from the one that was already connected. This new manifold

design changed the expected features of the water. This is why it was decided that action B1

would be delayed for some time in other to be able to characterize the new incoming water.

Despite the B1 activity was delayed, it didn´t require any additional cost in the budget in the

first stage of the project.

Hence, it was requested to delay this action as well as the deadline of the deliverable called

‘Final report on characterization of Blanca WWTP input water and of its possible seasonable

variations´ until July 2017.

The influent wastewater of Blanca WWTP was characterized by a wide range of different

components coming from the industrial effluents of surrounding companies. It was very

important to conduct an exhaustive seasonal study of the influent, so it could be perfectly

characterized.

The physical-chemical parameters of the flowing water entering the Blanca WWTP were

analyzed in order to monitor the plant seasonally throughout the year, observe its variability

and verify that the input would not affect the performance of the prototype.

It was measured the following parameters: pH; conductivity; SS; BOD; COD; N-TKN;

N-NH4; N-NO3; P-PO4, it was also carried out respirometric studies.

As a final conclusion of the studies carried out throughout this phase, it has been seen that

taking the appropriate measures of the installation operation, neither the process nor the

prototype should be at risk. The prototype can work as pretreatment and shock absorber the

Foreseen schedule

Foreseen duration 12 Months

Foreseen start date July 2015

Foreseen end date July 2016

13

input load, being able to retain part of this load in it and without entering the biological reactor,

thus, improving significantly the operating conditions of the installation.

Thus, it has been checked that the prototype is ready to treat this overload and it is

working properly attending to all kind of water.

All the details about the experimentation and the getting results can be consulted in the

deliverable B1_Final report on characterization of Blanca WWTP input water and of its

possible seasonable variations (provided with the Progress Report).

5.1.1.2) Action B2: Testing of different plastic supports for biomass

growth


Actual schedule


Actual start date March 2016

Actual end date March 2018

The introduction of plastic supports inside the anaerobic reactor has allowed the process to have

a compact and low maintenance technology that has helped to minimize the required space and

energy consumption.

To summarize the operation of the process, it worked as follows: The immobilized biomass

forms the so-called biofilm, which can be defined as the set of microorganisms and their

extracellular products adhered to the solid surface. The biofilm grows and detaches from the

support depending on the load received. The grouping of the microorganisms is arranged in a

gradient according to the needs of oxygen. Those populations formed in anoxic environments

will remain in the deepest layers of the supports. The solids detached from the support become

the excess sludge from a conventional system and therefore do not require recirculation thereof.

Study of active surface of different plastic fillings

First of all, the active surface of different plastic fillings was studied in order to determine its

best quality/price rate.

In order to determine the active surface and obtain the most suitable plastic support for

the process, a pilot plant study was carried out. It was formed by a supply tank in which it

was prepared synthetic water using EDAR´s own service water. In order to achieve the

nitrification process, it was provided with substrates (such as ammonium chloride and sodium

bicarbonate) to the supply tank. Each reactor with the fillings was constantly fed with

independent pumps and each tank also was ventilated and agitated with the aid of a blower.

Foreseen schedule


Foreseen start date November 2016

Foreseen end date March 2018

14

Figure 4. Simplified scheme of the experimental pilot plant

In the next table, it is exposed the parameters of the water employed for the experimentation:

Study of plastic filling K3 versus RVT9

In this part of the action the K3 plastic filling was studied in comparison to the RVT9 (RVT).

Characteristics of both plastics filling are shown in the next table:

Company Product Protected

surface (m2/m3)

Total

surface

(m2/m3)

Dimensions (d*h)

Anoxkaldnex K3 500 600 12mm*25mm

RVT Bioflow 9 No data 800 9 mm* 7 mm Table 5. Specifications of the plastic fillings

During the experimentation in the pilot plant, several parameters were controlled in order to

check that all the operational process was working in a property way: pH, Dissolved oxygen

and temperature.

Experimental results

In order to get details about the plastic filling stability and active surface, the nitrification rate

was studied. The nitrification rate is defined as the speed with which the nitrifying biomass is

able to carry out the general or progressive elimination of ammonium.

Water parameters

pH 7.6

Alcalinity (mg/L CaCO3-) 350

SS (mg/L) 11

Amonium (mg/L N-NH4+) 45

Table 4. Characteristics of the synthetic water

15

This parameter is obtained as follow:

𝑁𝑖𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑓𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑒 =(𝐶𝑖𝑛− 𝐶𝑜𝑢𝑡)∗𝑉

𝐴∗% 𝑃𝑙𝑎𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑐 𝑓𝑖𝑙𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑔 [Equation 1]

Where:

Cin = incoming concentration (g/L)

Cout = effluent concentration (L/day)

V = flow input (L/day)

A = active surface of the plastic filling (m2)

%plastic filling = %filling in the deposit

Figure 5. Nitrification rate considering both plastic filling with the same protected surface (S = 500m2/m3)

In the Figure 5 it is shown how the ratio between both plastic fillings are close to be constant

during all the experimentation. This approximation to the unit shows that the studied support

has a protected surface of 500 m2/m3.

In the next table it is shown the rates values maximum, minimum and average, considering

that both of them have approximately the same active surface.

g N-ammonium/m2 surface * day

K3 RVT9

Average 1.33 1.44

Maximum 2.03 2.12

Minimum 0.63 0.80

Performance 54.04 58.50 Table 6. Nitrification rate getting for each plastic filling

As a conclusion, despite getting instable values of performance in both plastic fillings it has

been obtained a ratio relation between the nitrification rate close to 1.7. This value gives

information about the RVT9 plastic filling, which means that this plastic filling is

employing 76.9% of its surface.

16

It has been considered and active surface of 540 m2/m3 approximately.

Study of K3 plastic filling versus CR

For the next study of plastic fillings, the characteristics of incoming water are the same showed

in Table 4.

The characteristics of the K3 and CR plastic filling studied are shown in the next table:

Company Product Protected

surface (m2/m3)

Total

surface

(m2/m3)

Dimensions (d*h)

Anoxkaldnex K3 500 600 12mm*25mm

Christian Stöhr HXF13KLL

(CR13) 806 955 13mm*13mm

Table 7. Specifications of the studied plastic fillings.

Experimental results

In this case, as in the previous one, the nitrification rate has been studied in order to get the

speed of ammonium consume of the bacteria biomass risen on the plastic filling. Nitrification

r

a

t

e

h

a

s

b

e

e

n

c

a

l

c

u

l

a

t

e

d

a

s

i

s

In this case, it has been checked that nitrification rates between both kind of plastic filling tends

to be equal, becoming the relation between both rates close to the unity.

In the next table, it is shown that both plastic fillings increase its nitrification rates compared

with the obtained results working with the 50% of occupation.

Nitrification rate

g N-ammonium/m2 surface * day

K3 CR13

Average 1.80 1.47

Maximum 2.60 2.20

Minimum 0.50 0.40

Performance 64.1% 80.7% Table 8. Consume of ammonium values for each plastic filling (35% occupation)

Once the ammonium consumption rates have been established for each plastic filling, it has

been possible to analyse the profitability of each surface.

Plastic

filling

Consumption rate (g N-

ammonium/m2

surface*day)

Cost

(€/m2surface)

Consumption

ammonium rate /

cost (g N-ammonium/€*day)

Vplastic filling necessary for 1

g

ammonium/day

Cost for 1 g ammonium/day

(€)

K3 1.93 0.95 2.03 0.64 0.30 CR13 1.68 0.39 4.31 0.59 0.18

Table 9. Activity and cost of the studied plastic fillings

17

As shown in Table 9, to consume 1 g of ammonium per day it has been required less volume

of plastic filling CR13 than the K3 one, which makes this plastic filling the best in

quality/price ratio of all the ones studied in the present project.

Conclusions

In general, it has been observed that the plastic filling CR13 is the one that has presented most

advantageous features. The CR13 plastic filling has taken more advantage of its active

surface comparing to other plastic fillings that were tested. Furthermore, it shows the best

performance ratio and best quality/price ratio in relation to other tested plastic fillings.

In order to know more information about all the experimental process, please check the B2.1_

Report on selection of plastic filling (delivered in the Progress Report) and B2.2_Report on

each plastic filling tested (4 months per each filling) and B2.3_Report on selection of candidate

plastic fillings to verify their behavior attached to this Report.

5.1.1.3) Action B3: Analysis of possible co-substrates in the anaerobic co-

digestion process


Actual schedule




The objective of this action has been to compile all the possible co-substrates of the nearby

companies in order to check which of them presents the most available and advantageous

features for the process. The demonstration procedure was divided in four main tasks related to

five milestones:

Enterprises inventory report

Nearby industries (located about 100 km away from Blanca) that may have potential waste

recovery were contacted for the anaerobic wastewater treatment plant process.

An initial inventory of companies in the area was carried out, especially with all those

susceptible to produce residues in their process, which may be suitable for the co-digestion

process.

After considering the best companies to provide the most suitable wastes, potential companies

were contacted requesting periodic samples of the wastes which have been analysed in the plant.

same that have been analysed in the plant.

Foreseen schedule




18

Final report on waste to be used in the present process

In order to determine the viability of the residues as a co-substrate in the process, the

characterization of the residues has been made. The objective of these tests was to define the

following parameters for each of the residues:

Proportion of biodegradable organic matter Volatile suspended solids, VSS

Concentration of micro and macronutrients Proportion of total solids, SST

Alkalinity Acidity

C / N ratio Ammonium

pH Total Nitrogen, Nt

Chemical Oxygen Demand, COD Total phosphorus, Pt

After this first analytical stage, companies with a waste that was more likely to adapt to

anaerobic process (high organic load, organic origin and more biodegradability) were selected

and studied.

Calibration of the mathematical model completed and tested

At the very beginning of the project, a modeling program was used for the correct mathematical

calibration. This program is especially designed for this kind of anaerobic reactor (UASB).

As conclusion of the system calibration, preliminary data was obtained for the design, which

was verified with the design and structural calculations performed in the B4 actions.

On the other hand, simulations were carried out to verify the hydraulics of the system and to be

able to design the cascade of water distribution inside the reactor. For this purpose, the CFD

program of fluid hydraulics was used.

The final result of the inflow is constant and equal to 8 m3/h.

Dimensioning of prototype completed and tested

In this stage, it was planned to make an approach of the behavior of the model process.

For a first approximation, the UASB digestion module was configured in the GPS-X program

of Hydromantis with the operating conditions for the project reactor, located in the WWTP

from Blanca (Murcia).

Complete information about Action 3 can be found in B3.1_Initial inventory about the

companies located in the area, B3.2_Final report about the characterization and waste with a

major potential and B3.3_Final report on calibration of the mathematical model delivered in

previous reports.

19

5.1.1.4) Action B4: Prototype design, construction and commissioning


Actual schedule


Actual start date April 2015

Actual end date April 2017

The objective of this action was to build a demonstration plant of a significant size that assures

achieving the objectives of the project.

The prototype design, construction and commissioning were divided into two main tasks related

to three milestones. Following the timetable, all the milestones have been achieved.

Design of the prototype

To carry out the construction project in the water treatment plant from Blanca, the following

parameters were taken into account:

o The flow to be treated was 650 m3/d, and it was considered that it may be increasing

depending on the purification results obtained and the reactor operation.

o A pumping well located between the pretreatment and the selector divided the water

to be treated in two lines; on the one hand, treating the part that the new system can

undertake with plastic padding and, on the other hand, the rest working by a bypass

in the biological reactor.

Further information is displayed in the Deliverable B4.1_Basic sizing of the prototype, provided

with the Mid Term Report.

Design considerations

To carry out the correct design of the prototype it was necessary to take into account the

following considerations:

Flow and load variations, temperature and organic concentration, fraction of undissolved

organic material, wastewater alkalinity, nutrients, macronutrients, inorganic and organic toxic

compounds, solids retention time, expected production of methane gas, necessary efficient of

treatment, sulfide production, ammonia toxicity and characteristics of plastic support.

Finally, with the design of the prototype it was possible to build it up. In the next pictures it is

shown the civil work, pipe installation, electrical installation, automation, etc.

Foreseen schedule


Foreseen start date April 2015

Foreseen end date April 2017

20

o Construction works

Complete information can be found in Deliverable B4.2_Report on the construction of the

anaerobic treatment unit; Report on the construction of co-digestion and waste treatment unit;

Report on the construction of cogeneration unit and gas line; Report on the prototype

implementation and Basic sizing of prototype delivered with the Progress Report.

5.1.1.5) Action B5: Demonstration and implementation actions in the facilities

of Blanca WWTP


Actual schedule


Actual start date April 2017

Actual end date

July 2018

Once the pilot plant was implemented and working properly, it started gathering data of the

process. Following the timetable, all the milestones planned during this action have been

achieved.

Foreseen schedule


Foreseen start date January 2017


Figure 7. Final prototype implementation

Figure 6. Construction work

21

Report of production of biogas and biogas quality for different co-substrates

During this part of the action several co-substrates from different companies have been selected,

analysed and probed in the pilot plant in order to figure out which of them present the best

features, especially in terms of elimination of COD.

In this report it will be summarized some of the co-substrates that have been checked during

the project.

o Sugary water

One of the selected co-substrates was sugary water from industries dedicated to the sweets

production. During this experimentation, an increase in the biogas production was observed.

Ratio gas production Without co-substrate With co-substrate m3/Kg DQO incoming 0.328 0.436 m3/Kg DQO eliminated 0.59 0.72 m3/Kg MV incoming 0.639 0.831 m3/Kg MV eliminated 1.24 1.28

Table 10. Comparison biogas production with and without so-substrate

It could be concluded that the co-digestion with this kind of co-substrate is an excellent

alternative in order to increase the production of biogas and therefore reduce the

operation costs.

o Oily waters

Another of the selected co-substrates as a possible candidate was the fatty waters from the feed

manufacturing industry. These products were subjected to evaporation and centrifugation

treatment from which the effluent waste was extracted.

Regarding the gas production, an increase in the ratio was observed after the addition of this

substrate, which has implied an improvement in the anaerobic digestion of the sludge.

Ratio gas production Without co-substrate With co-substrate m3/Kg DQO incoming 0.301 0.452 m3/Kg DQO eliminated 0.421 0.709 m3/Kg MV incoming 0.615 0.786 m3/Kg MV eliminated 1.450 1.513

Table 11. Comparison biogas production with and without substrate

In this case, it was demonstrated that the co-digestion with this type of co-substrate was a

great alternative as well, but the results obtained from oily waters were worse than with

the ones of the sugary water.

o Aqueous substrate of methanol

22

Finally, experiments were carried out using an aqueous methanol base as substrate. This

substrate comes from the distillation and rectification of some of the batches of various

chemical and pharmaceutical industrial processes.

In the next picture, it is shown the biogas flow produced in the RAMSES prototype as well as

the % of methane produced:

With the experiments that have been carried out, it has been concluded that the addition of co-

substrates to the anaerobic digestion process encourages the production of biogas in the

plant, thus improving the self-consumption process, reducing the CO2 emissions and

increasing the system sustainability.

The following table shows a comparison of biogas production taking into account the different

substrates that were used in the process:

As can be seen in Table 12, the substrate “Methanol” is the best substrate regarding the

biogas production. These come from substrates from various industrial production

processes and activities of waste metals.

substrate Sugary water Oily water Milk fats Saucer making

water

Methanol

Biogas

production

(m3/ Kg MV)

1.28 1.51 1.13 1.51 1.7

Table 12. Rate comparison of biogas production among different analysed substrates

Figure 8. Biogas production flow and % produced methane

23

Report on the composition of sludge hygienized

Other point that includes this action has been the composition of the produced sludge and its

comparative with the analytical values that are included in the normative.

The general framework is given by the European Directive 86/278/EEC on the protection

of soils in the use of sludge in agriculture. This Royal Decree creates the regulatory

framework with the objective of combining the production of sewage sludge and its agricultural

use in Spain, with the effective protection of the physical and biotic factors affected by the

agrarian production process.

In the next tables, the limit values included in the normative are shown:

During this action it has been compared the corresponding analytics of the sludge from the

wastewater treatment plant with the values of the Table 14.

As can be seen comparing both tables, the sludge that was extracted at the exit of the

Blanca´s WWTP comply with the standard indicated in Royal Decree 1310/1990, which

regulates the use of sewage sludge in the agricultural sector, thus fulfilling one of the main

objectives of the RAMSES project: to obtain sludge of enough quality for reusing in the

agricultural sector.

Table 13. Limit value of concentration of heavy metals in

soils and sludge Table 14. Analytical report results after RAMSES prototype installation

24

Report on the quality of the treated water

In this line, the Royal Decree 509/1996, of March 15, on the development of Royal Decree-

Law 11/1995, of December 28, establishes the norms applicable to the treatment of urban

wastewater, and the rules on collection, purification and discharge of these waters.

According to this regulation, the requirements for discharges from urban wastewater treatment

facilities are:

Parameters Concentration Minimum percentage of reduction

Biochemical Oxygen Demand

(DBO5 a 20ºC) 25 mg/l O2 70-90

Chemical demand of oxygen

(DQO) 125 mg/l O2 75

Total solids suspension 35 mg/l 90

Table 15. Quality requirements for the wastes from waste water treatment urban plants

In the next tables, it can be seen the measured parameters of exit water from the Blanca´s

(WWTP) throughout the project:

Exit water of the WWTP

from Blanca 2018 Unit April May June

pH

7,5 7,5 7,3

Conductivity µs/cm 1.953 1.814 1.721

SS ppm 4 3 2

DBO5 ppm 5 5 5

DQO ppm 26 23 22

N-NTK ppm 1,7 2,0 1,8

N-NH4 ppm 0,4 0,2 0,3

N-NO3 ppm 0,9 0,6 0,8

P-PO4 ppm 1,4 1,5 1,1

Table 16. Measured parameters of exit water from Blanca´s (WWTP) 2018

Comparing Table 16 with Table 15, water parameters from Blanca´s WWTP comply

perfectly with the quality parameters established in Table 15.

Further information about this action can be found in the deliverables B5.1_Report of

production of biogas and biogas quality for different co-substrates, B5.2_Report on the

composition of sludge hygienized, B5.3_Report on the quality of the treated water, B5.4_

Inventory of co-substrates in order of efficiency in the production of biogas, B5.5_Manual of

energetic optimization of EDAR conventional applying this technology and B5.6_ Report of

operation and production of biogas performance as well as behaviour of the analysed co-

substrates” delivered within this report.

25

5.1.2) Monitoring of the impact of the project actions (C)

5.1.2.1) Action C1: Monitoring the environmental impact of the project


Actual schedule




The table below shows the final status of the environmental impact:

IMPACT Actual state Observations

Evolution of the

quantity of water

reused

The water quality of the plant's output has improved notably since the implementation of the prototype

Values of organic matter have improved from

950 (mg/L per day) to 155 at the end of the

project and values of suspended solids have

improved from 355 to 28.

Increasing the

volume of water

reused from

irrigation ponds

To improve notably the output of the installation water 100% of the water that has come out of the plant has been able to be used for agricultural irrigation

The parameters of water quality obtained every day, have allowed that water can be used for irrigation, so this environmental indicator has been achieved 100%.

Increasing

reclaimed land for

agricultural uses

By increasing the amount of water susceptible to be used in agricultural

irrigation, surfaces irrigated with this water have increased

Access to the data of the Community of irrigation, where there is an increase in the water provided

for irrigation from the water treatment plant. As all the quality parameters have been achieved, this environmental indicator has been achieved 100%.

Reduction of

industrial waste

from the enterprises

located nearby

It has been treated waste within our facility within the process of co-digestion, different companies have given us wastes to check in the prototype and determine the most suitable to be use

At the beginning of the project organic waste

used in co-digestion was 0 (Tn/day) and at the

end of the project it was of 2.50

Reduction the

electrical

consumption of the

WWTP

We have seen reduced the consumption of the installation, by significantly reducing the input load in the biological reactor, as well as due to the production of biogas generated

At the beginning of the project electrical

consumption was of 365000 (Kwh/year) and at

the end it was of 182500 (Kwh/year)

Reduction aeration

needs of the

biological reactor

Since the start-up of the prototype the hours of operation of the aeration equipment have

been reduced, since when inserting less load into the reactor, the aeration equipment does not have to work so many hours.

At the beginning of the project aeration needs

were 14 and at the end of the project it was 8

Table 17. Indicators with environmental impact

At this point all the indicators foreseen at the beginning of the project have been met, fulfilling

the expectations regarding the achieved values:

Evolution of the quantity of water reused.

The water quality of the plant´s output has improved notably since the implementation of the

prototype.

In this point we want to refer to the data and yields at the output of the RAMSES prototype. As

were specified in the initial objectives of the project, the set objectives were:

Foreseen schedule




26

To improve the quality of treated water, thus increasing the amount of reclaimed water

available for reuse and reducing the amount that it is discharged. It is expected that >

90% of the organic matter and suspended solids of the wastewater are removed before

the biological treatment.

The following graphs regarding DQO and suspended solids compile updated data have covering

the whole project lifetime.

Further information can be found in the Deliverable B5.3_Report on the quality of the treated

water, where the performance of elimination for SS is also updated.

As we can see in the Figure 10, values of organic matter have improved from 950 ppm

approximately from the incoming water to 155 ppm approximately at the exit of the RAMSES

prototype.

Figure 9. Performance of elimination of SS at the exit of the RAMSES prototype, before the biological conventional

process

Figure 10. Performance of elimination of COD at the exit of the RAMSES prototype, before the biological conventional

process

27

In the same way, as we can see in the Figure 9, values of suspended solids have improved from

355 ppm approximately to 28 ppm approximately at the exit of the RAMSES prototype.

Most of the parameters shown in this report and related deliverables are not calculated by

mathematical methodology. They are detected with different laboratory methods. The analysis

carried out in the laboratory for the detection of such parameters are described below.

For the detection of COD

Both at the entrance and at the exit of the RAMSES prototype, it has been used the HACH kits

and its spectrophotometer. The methodology for the measurements is the following:

o Homogenize 100 ml of sample during 30 seconds.

o Preheat the COD Hach special reactor at 150ºC.

o Use a reagent tube for COD digestion of an appropriate range.

o Add the sample indicated in the kit to the bottle.

o Shake the tube

o Prepare a reagent blank repeating the same steps above but replacing the sample

with deionized water

o Heat the tubes 2 hours

o Wait for them to cool

o Shake

o Use the appropriate method according to the range, in any case use the Hach

own adapter for reading the COD

28

Figure 11. Methodology for the determination of the COD

Calculation of suspended solids:

Laboratory procedure:

o Wash three 45 µm filters with 20-30 mL of de-ionized water to remove any solid

that was left over the filter. Filters are placed in their own aluminium containers,

drying them 30 minutes in an oven of 140ºC.

o The container and the filter are placed in a desiccator and weighed. This step is

repeated several times in order to obtain the average weight of the filter and the

container.

Obtaining TSS

o Filter a sample of 100 mL using the filter prepared in the previous step.

o Put each filter in its own aluminium container to dry each one in an oven during

1 hour to 140ºC.

o Cool the filter and the container in a desiccator and wwigh.

o Repeat this step until you get the average weight of TSS.

29

𝐓𝐬𝐬𝐦𝐠/𝐋 = (𝐀𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐠𝐞 𝐰𝐞𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭 𝐚𝐟𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐟𝐢𝐥𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐢𝐧 𝐠 − 𝐀𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐠𝐞 𝐰𝐞𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭 𝐛𝐞𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐞 𝐟𝐢𝐥𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐢𝐧 𝐠)𝐱(

𝟏𝟎𝟎𝟎𝐦𝐠𝐠 )

𝐒𝐚𝐦𝐩𝐥𝐞 𝐯𝐨𝐥𝐮𝐦𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐰𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐢𝐧 𝐋

Calculation of CO2 emissions (Kg CO2/year)

For this calculation, an emission factor of 0.385 Kg of CO2 eq/ kWh has been considered.

Calculation of biogas

For the calculation of biogas production, it has been used the following methodology:

We have updated the methane data production in the process (renewable energy production)

together with the alkalinity data. In this figure, we can see an average of 65% production of

methane and a stable process because of the alkalinity values are constant and low.

30

Figure 12. Methane production during the project

All the detailed information can be found in the C1.2_Report on the situation after the project

implementation and a reviewed version of the C1.1_Report on environmental effects of the

project: Baseline has been also included in this report.

The remaining indicators shown in table 17, such as the of reduction industrial waste and the

reduction of electrical consumption, have been evaluated in AnnexIII_KPI evaluation.

5.1.2.2) Action C2: Analysis of socioeconomics effects


Actual schedule




The table below shows the current status of the socioeconomic impact:

IMPACT CURRENT STATE CURRENT STATE

Economic viability of

the technology

The rate of return has been analysed With the new process, it has been generated an extra energy that could be used for self-consumption.

Creation of job

positions in water

treatment

Job creation was analysed at the end of the project

Currently the number jobs in WWTPs are more than 400.

Foreseen schedule




31

The possible creation of

other job positions or

activities indirectly

derived from the

project

Indirect job creation was analysed at the end of the project

This project has contributed to the improvement of the know-how of ACCIONA Agua, making the company

more competitive so improving its possibilities to present innovative offers, which include the RAMSES prototype or similar technologies. This makes that the possibilities to win offers increase as well as the necessary personal to present and work in these new offers.

Change s in the trend of

reusing water

The outgoing water of the WWTP is

can be used for agricultural irrigation, since the quality of it has been improved (with a lower cost of treatment)

Thanks to the improvement of the water quality as can

be seen in the action B5, 100% of the outgoing water of the WWTP can be used for irrigation. Thus, the m3 of water in irrigation of WWTP in Murcia has increased during the project.

Involvement of regional

companies of the

revaluation of waste

with organic content

More than 100 companies that produce residues (susceptible to be introduced in the system as

cosubstrates) have been detected

A high number of enterprises have been involved in order to take advantage of its wastes. In this way and as be seen in the Action B5 a lot of substrate from

nearby companies have been used for the co-digestion process.

Increasing land

treatment for their

recovery and use for

agricultural purposes as

fertile soil

With the new anaerobic digestion prototype, it has been possible a greater stabilization and sanitation of the sludge. It has allowed to use 100% of the sludge output of the WWTP for agricultural use as

fertilizer.

The hectares of sludge in agriculture of WWTP in Murcia has increased during the project in a 2%, which has increased notably the value of these lands as fertile. This value will be increase with the After LIFE plan objectives.

Table 18. Indicators with socioeconomic impact

All the detailed information can be found in the C2.1_Report on Final socioeconomic status

and a reviewed version of the C2.2_Report on socioeconomic effects of the project: Baseline

has been also included in this report.

5.1.3) Public awareness and dissemination of results (D)

Action D1 has encompassed all duration of the project and has involved both partners;

ACCIONA Agua and ESAMUR.

Following the Communication Plan, a description of different dissemination activities

developed is detailed below:

5.1.3.1) Action D1: Project communication plan


Actual schedule




At the very beginning of the project it was designed the project´s logo and corporate image.

Foreseen schedule




32

Furthermore, ACCIONA Agua elaborated together with ESAMUR a Communication Plan in

the deliverable D1.1 sent with the Mid Term Report. Furthermore, leaflets were designed to be

delivered in several events. Broader information can be found in the deliverable D1.2_General

communication leaflets, D1.3_Communication project dossier first year and

D1.4_Communication project dossier second year, delivered with previous reports.

During the third year, several events have been carried out to disseminate the project, the

following table summarizes the ones carried out so far. In the deliverable D1.5_Communication

project dossier third year more detail information related to this action can be consulted:

Tip Number Place Comments

“Día mundial del agua”

Advertising campaign

1 Murcia Event to celebrate and commemorate the international day of the water

Conferences/Talks 2 Murcia, Toledo IWA, AEDyR

News 2 Water technical publications, Local and National newspapers

Relevant events: Visit of different political authorities; Formal inauguration by the Minister of

Water, Agriculture, Livestock and Fisheries of the Region of Murcia

Table 19. Dissemination activities

5.1.3.2) Action D2: Dissemination through notice boards


Actual schedule


Actual start date October 2015

Actual end date April 2016

Project noticeboards were also designed and elaborated by ACCIONA Agua and ESAMUR.

The noticeboards and panel were created as committed on the Project Communication and

Dissemination plan in order to be displayed during the project duration in strategic visible

places as the principal door of the WWTP. The noticeboard designed, described the

environmental problem targeted, the proposed methodology and the expected results.

Foreseen schedule


Foreseen start date October 2015

Foreseen end date April 2016

Figure 13. LIFE RAMSES logo

33

Figure 14. Notice board designed for the LIFE RAMSES project

Besides, a poster was elaborated to promote and inform quickly and visually about the

development of the activities. The notice boards installed can be found in the deliverable

D1.3_Communication project dossier first year and D1.4_Communication project dossier

second year, delivered with previous reports.

5.1.3.3) Action D3: Project web site


Actual schedule




The webpage was designed and developed with the support of an external assistance.

However, ACCIONA Agua was involved in this activity providing all contents and ideas.

Figure 15. Webpage designed for the LIFE RAMSES project

The project website contains all the reference information about the environmental problem,

how the project intends to solve it, the beneficiaries, project activities, expected results, updates

and so on.

Foreseen schedule




34

Figure 16. Main information contained in the web page

Several articles and press releases have been published, furthermore in order to reach more

audience and to increase the impact of the project development, the presence in several twitter

accounts have been relevant.

https://twitter.com/adelamcacha/status/726030772797341696

https://twitter.com/hashtag/esamur

Broader information is available in the deliverable called D3_Functionalities description of the

LIFE-RAMSES website, provided with the Mid Term Report.

5.1.3.1) Action D4: Layman´s Report


Actual schedule

Actual duration 1 Month

Actual start date June 2018


In order to raise awareness of the development of the project, its results and outcomes, a

Layma´s report has been elaborated. This document contains details of the development of the

project, its aims and objectives and its results. It has been elaborated both in Spanish and

English so as to reach a broader audience. further information of this document is displayed in

the deliverable called D.4_Layman´s Report.

5.1.3.2) Action D5: Networking with other projects


Actual schedule




Foreseen schedule

Foreseen duration 1 Month

Foreseen start date June 2018


Foreseen schedule




https://twitter.com/adelamcacha/status/726030772797341696

https://twitter.com/hashtag/esamur

35

Throughout the duration of the project it was changed information and contact with several

LIFE project and others. Among them:

o LIFE Anadry project. This project consists in an anaerobic dry digestion process

as an alternative to conventional sludge treatment and management.

Complete information about all the project which with networking has been done can be found

in deliverable D5_Report on networking with other projects.

5.1.4) Project management and monitoring of the project progress (E)

5.1.4.1) Action E1: Project management and monitoring


Actual schedule




ACCIONA Agua as the Coordinating Beneficiary has been in charge of providing effective

management of the project and being the main link between the other beneficiary and the

Commission and the LIFE External Monitoring Team.

All details regarding implementation of this Action are described in the above section 5

(Administrative part) and the deliverable presented E1_Management Handbook (Mid Term

Report).

5.1.4.2) Action E2: After LIFE plan (E2)


Actual schedule


Actual start date May 2018


This action has been finished with the elaboration of the document “After LIFE Communication

plan”.

Main goals of the After LIFE plan

The three main objectives of the After-LIFE Communication Plan are the following:

Foreseen schedule




Foreseen schedule


Foreseen start date May 2018


36

o To continue disseminating the project results in order to boost the implementation of

the technology and to raise awareness especially among final end users.

o To reinforce those dissemination activities that have not achieved the expected results,

either to reach the defined audience or to properly communicate the results.

o To develop a communication strategy for the actions continuing after the project.

Activities

o Dissemination of final results: Dissemination products, Power Point presentations,

Poster.

o Maintenance of the project web site: Periodically updates, depending on the

information available.

o Technology transfer: Once the first plant has been obtained, the R&D department will

work together with the Execution department, in order to construct the first full-scale

plant. After this first case study, the technology can be implemented internationally and

exported to other sectors.

In the deliverable E2_After LIFE communication Plan, it can be found the complete information

about the After LIFE plan.

5.1.4.3) Action E3: Indicators


Actual schedule


Actual start date May 2018


The analysis of the indicators is updated below:

Intermediate indicator on the project Current state

Reclamation uses. According to the water quality, it

could be reused for different purposes. The indicator

should reflect which theses possible uses are.

100% of the outgoing water of the plant is being used for irrigation, since the output parameters that are obtained are optimal.

List of co-substrates suitable for anaerobic co-

digestion and their impact on reclaimed water

quality.

The list is completed and all of them are already analysed. In Action B5 can be seen the entire list of co-substrates that have been analysed and its results.

Stability of the process towards variability in

wastewater influent.

The objective is totally achieved, the process is stabilized

independently to the input load.

Maximum amount of biogas produced per type of co-

substrate.

It has been shown in Action B5 that with the employ of methanol as co-substrate we get a Hugh increase in the biogas production, getting performance in the biogas product up to 60%.

Reduction of 50 % of sludge amount We have obtained a reduction of up 50% of the produced sludge.

Foreseen schedule


Foreseen start date May 2018


37

The sludge must fulfill existing directives for

agronomic reuse

In action B5 has been analysed the quality of the produced sludge with the parameters established by the normative and it has been

checked that parameters match 100% with the normative.

The sludge fulfils parameters of proposed directives. Sludge comply with the restrictive parameters of the directive of use of the sludge as fertilizer.

5 new industries interested in revalorizing their

residues (per year).

The objective is 100% achieved. We have obtained a list of 100 targeted companies to valorise their waste in our facilities.

At least one farmer association interested in using

reclaimed water for their crops irrigation.

This objective is fulfilled. Several irrigation associations are

demanding water from the plant to use in their crops.

Number of visits to the website. 20 new visitors per

month, 500 visits per year (minimum value)

This objective is fulfilled.

Invitations to water-related events (1 per year) During the last year, we have participated in 7 events as speakers, explaining the objectives and results of the project.

Table 20. Programme indicators

In deliverable E3.3_Form programme indicators – FR the information related to this phase can

be checked in detail, as well as the previous version of the programme indicators called E3.2_

Form programme indicators – PR and E3.1_ Form programme indicators – MTR.

Furthermore, the Project Specific Indicators can be found in Annex I where several factors

are analysed before the project and 3 and 5 years after the project.

5.1.4.4) Action E4: Audit


Actual schedule



Actual end date

July 2018

ACCIONA AGUA, as the coordinating beneficiary, has hired PKF ATTEST, with ROAC

number S1520 and address Alameda de Recalde street, number 36 8th floor, 48009 Bilbao

(Vizcaya), SPAIN, as external auditor for the final audit of the project.

The signed certificates on the financial statement for both partners have been attached in

deliverable E4_Audit report.

5.2) Main deviations, problems and corrective actions implemented

The project has finalised according to the initial timetable; there have not been delays in the

phases. The technical and economic part have finished according to the proposal.

The action B1 was delayed for another year, as was explained in the midterm report, at no

additional cost to the budget. This was because in the middle of the action, a new manifold was

connected to the WWTP. Finally, due to a delay in action B4 (owing to suppliers “delay in the

delivery”), the action B5 started later and finished approximately at the end of the year.

Foreseen schedule

Foreseen duration

36 Months Foreseen start date

July 2015 Foreseen end date

July 2018

38

Action Name of the action Initial data to

start

Real data to start Deadline

B1 Parameterization of WWTP feed water characteristics and its annual variability

July 2015 July 2015 July 2017

B2 Testing of different plastic supports for biomass growth

November 2016 March 2016 March 2018

B5 Demonstration and implementation actions in the facilities

January 2017 April 2017 July 2018

Table 21. Main deviations

The rest of the phases have been according to the timetable.

5.3) Evaluation of project implementation

5.3.1) Methodology applied

LIFE RAMSES project has been implemented by applying different methodologies what

contribute to obtain the expected actions results. Regarding each type of action, these are the

main methodologies and protocols implemented:

Implementation actions

In those actions any partner has taken in charge of the action in which they have more

experience. Moreover, Acciona Agua has continuous presence in the WWTP, so they have

helped in the oversight works. On the other hand, ESAMUR has participated in all the technical

decision thus in all the operation and maintenance parameters for working prototype.

Dissemination actions

Once the communication and dissemination plan were delivered, it has served as reference for

showing the way of procedure and the scope of the different works and documents described

on it. Both partners have a copy of the communication and dissemination plan and has acted in

consequence to achieve the expected results. Thus, an After Life plan has been elaborated which

includes all the methodology and dissemination actions of the project.

Coordination actions

Since the start of the project a monitoring protocol was running so as to control the progress of

the project (Task E.1.1). this monitoring task has included the establishment of a set of

indicators. These indicators have been monitored regularly so as to control the project progress.

A Project Management Guidelines deliverable was elaborated and circulated among partners.

This deliverable has acted as a methodology tool for project management.

5.3.2) Project implementation evaluation

39

In order to evaluate the project implementation and the progress of the different actions, several

indicators were monitored in each action. These indicators are quantifiable items and have been

achieved through the development of the project and have represented the progress of the

project tasks.

In the following table it is shown the assessment of the objectives met by achievements of the

expected results obtained by implementing the tasks of the project actions:

Action Foreseen in the revised

proposal Achieved Evaluation

Action B1

Characterization of

Blanca WWTP input

water and of its

possible seasonable

variations

From M1 to M24 100%

Final results showed that the

influent the plant despite its

seasonal variability, by

occasional industrial effluents, is

apt to be treated in the new

system.

Action B2

Selection of plastic

filling From M17 to M32 100%

During this action several plastic

fillings were experimented in

order to test which of them

presented the best features to the

process.

Each plastic filling

tested (4 months per

each filling)

From M17 to M32 100%

It was tested in a pilot plant

existing previously in

ACCIONA Agua each selected

plastic filling.

Selection of

candidate plastic

fillings to verify their

behavior


After the experimentation with

each plastic filling it was selected

the best one which presented the

best ratio quality/price.

Action B3

Ccharacterization

and waste with a

major potential

within the process

(that is to say richer

in organic matter)

From M1 to M36 100%

It was obtained an exhaustive

anaerobic biodegradability

characterization of wastes

susceptible of entry the WWTP,

as potential fonts for biogas

generation.

Initial inventory

about the companies

located in the area

From M1 to M36 100% It was obtained and inventory of

enterprises in the area and their

wastes.

Calibration of the

mathematical model From M1 to M36 100%

We have a good mathematical

model for the process and

calibrated, minimizing the risks

of incorrect dimensioning of the

prototype

Collection, storage

and dosage of co-

substrate

From M1 to M36 100%

With the list of wastes selected, it

was probed each of them in

order to select the best. Finally it

was selected the methanolic

waste.

Action B4

Basic sizing of

prototype From M9 to M21 100%

Initial sizing, prior to more

detailed design.

Construction of the

anaerobic treatment

unit

From M9 to M21 100% Finalised and working properly.

Construction of the

cogeneration unit

and gas line

From M9 to M21 100% Finalised and working properly

40

Construction of co-

digestion and waste

treatment unit

From M9 to M21 100% Finalised and working properly

Prototype

implementation From M9 to M21 100% Working properly

Action B5

Production of biogas

and biogas quality

for different co-

substrates

From M19 to M36 100% It has been getting performance

up to 60% of biogas production.

Composition of

sludge hygienized From M19 to M36 100%

Analytical of sludge hygienized

showed correct composition

compared with the regulatory

normative

Quality of the

treated water From M19 to M36 100%

Analytical of the treated water

showed correct composition

compared with the regulatory

normative

Co-substrates in

order of efficiency in

the production of

biogas


After the experimentation with

different co-substrates,

methanolic co-substrate was

selected due to its best properties

in the co-digestion

Manual of energetic

optimization of

WWTP conventional

applying this

technology


It has been developed a complete

manual with the optimal

energetic parameters to take

into account for the working

process.

Operation and

production of biogas

performance as well

as behavior of the

analyzed co-

substrates

From M19 to M36 100% It has been getting performance

up to 60% of biogas production.

Action C1

Baseline

environmental

impact of the project

From M1 to M36 100%

It has been realised final analysis

about the environmental impact

with successful results

(Increasing reusable water, land

for agricultural uses, reduction

of industrial wastes, reduction

the electrical consumption,

reduction aeration needs of the

biological reactor…)

Situation after

project

implementation

From M1 to M36 100%

A Final LIFE report was

realised with all the relevant

information to take into account

and the proposals for the actions

after the LIFE project.

Action C2

Baseline :

socioeconomic

baseline

From M1 to M36 100% List of socioeconomics indicators

was finished correctly

Final socioeconomic

status From M1 to M36 100%

Final socioeconomic status was

finished correctly

Action D1

Communication plan From M1 to M36 100%

Communication plan and all the

communication information

throughout the duration of the

project have been developed in

several deliverables

General

communication

Leaflets

From M1 to M36 100% More than 100 copies published

with general project information

41

Communication

project dossier first

year

From M1 to M36 100%

Document, where they have been

collected, all actions carried out

communication, first year of the

project.

Communication

project dossier

second year

From M1 to M36 100%



communication, second year of

the project.

Communication

project dossier third

year

Auditing report

From M1 to M36 100%



communication, third year of the

project and auditing report.

Action D2

Notice Boards From M4 to M9 100% Notice boards for the WWTP

and Offices

Action D3

Web Site From M1 to M36 100% Web Site, with all information

relation with the project,

advance, results, interest data….

Functionalities

description of the

LIFE-RAMSES

website

From M1 to M36 100%

Reflects the company’s

objectives and interest LIFE

RAMSES project as well as the

latest news of it during its

progress

Action D4

Layman’s report From M34 to M36 100% It has been finished and

developed as another deliverable

Action D5

Report on

networking with

other projects

From M1 to M36 100%

Interaction with other projects,

stakeholders, institutions, to

share experiences and results

with other related projects and

networks and to find synergies.

Action E1

Project Management

Handbook From M1 to M36 100%

In this document, to give a quick

and short overview of the most

relevant project information,

procedures and conditions for

the partners in the RAMSES

Project

Action E2

After LIFE

communication Plan From M34 to M36 100%

It has been finished and

developed as another deliverable

Action E3

Form programme

indicators – FR From M1 to M36 100%

The referent final document that

sets the direction for future

exploitation and dissemination

of project results.

Form programme

indicators – MR From M1 to M36 100%

The referent mid document that

sets the direction for future

exploitation and dissemination

of project results.

Action E4

Auditing report From M34 to M36 100%

Table 22. Project´s actions implementation

5.3.3) Effectiveness of the dissemination activities

As already described before, the consortium has carried out different activities to guarantee

LIFE RAMSES objectives and expected results, as well as the project progress is disseminated

42

amongst the most relevant stakeholders. For more detailed information about next plans in the

project please see the deliverable After Life plan.

5.3.3.1) Policy impact

As the pilot phase has not properly started its impact at EU level and in terms of policy

development is still not relevant.

However, it is important to highlight that:

In terms of EU Added value of the project, RAMSES LIFE addresses water scarcity

which is an environmental problem that will affect 30% of the world population in 2030

(www.2030wrg.org) and concerns several European regions which already suffer from

water shortage, aggravated at times by its indirect consequences such as erosion and

desertification, loss of arable land and mothballing of land use.

In addition, the technology developed in this project can be applied in 80% of the

WWTP located in the European Union (there are 3,500 plants with similar flow to

that chosen for the demonstrator, and the technology is suitable for all of them,

particularly those showing hydric stress or hydric resources lack).

All objectives of the project are aligned which supported legislation specific with

Directive 2000/60/EC, , which is known as the EU Water Framework Directive, and in

Spain, Directive 1620/2007, of 7th December, for example:

o To improve the quality of treated water

o To introduce new process or technologies in order to achieve treated water of

enough quality for reuse in high-value applications.

To increase the amount of water available for different uses

To reduce CO2 emission, use technologies more efficiency.

o To carry out laboratory analyses by end users at different points

Directive 2000/60/CE deals with the measures that Member States shall adopt in order

to protect river basin districts and the aquatic environment. One of the indicated

measures is water reuse from treated wastewater, which moreover, was previously

identified as a need by the Urban Wastewater Treatment Directive (91/271/EEC).

According to the Article 12 of this Directive “treated wastewater shall be reused

whenever appropriate” under the requirement of “minimizing the adverse effect on the

environment”. In the European Union there are about 18,000 hm3 of potentially reusable

water from Wastewater Treatment Plants (WWTP), of which only 1-2 % is reused.

Moreover, the reclaimed water has sometimes certain amounts of chemical and

microbiological substances above legal limits that prevent it from reusing in high-value

applications. Water reuse can have two important environmental benefits. The most

obvious is the provision of an alternative water resource. The second is the reduction of

environmental impacts by reducing or eliminating wastewater disposal, which results in

the preservation of water quality downstream. Therefore, the large benefit for the

WWTP of the European Union will be to ensure the water availability devoted to

irrigation, apart from being executed by means of a self-sustainable process with a lower

environmental impact than that currently used.

http://www.2030wrg.org/

43

5.4) Analysis of benefits

Once the LIFE RAMSES project has finalised it is interesting to highlight all the achieved

benefits during the project:

Several information sources of the project and its benefits including short reports

and workshop proceedings, as well as all the publishes information in the website

of the project.

Networking with partners in the preparation of other national or international

projects regarding energy savings in waste water treatment plants using renewable

sources.

Issuing a document with WWTP guidelines with new process included.

Identification of other WWTP in Europe where the prototype demonstrated on

RAMSES could be implemented.

For more detailed information please consult the Annex II: “Answer to the questions raised in

previous reports and monitoring visits”.

5.4.1) Environmental benefits

Once the project has finished it has been seeing all the environmental benefits achieved during

the process:

The provision of an alternative water resource.

The reduction of environmental impacts by reducing or eliminating wastewater

disposal, which results in the preservation of water quality downstream.

The waste elimination and its turning into cosubstrates, permits to go ahead in terms of

wastes, where the its non-production or elimination prevail over the reusing, recycling

or rejecting.

Removal of industrial waste from the management cycle, using it as co-substrate in co-

digestion process. The biodegradable waste generated by industries nearby WWTP is

currently managed directly to landfills, causing problems as generation of lixiviates,

emission of gases such as CO2, methane and other volatile organic compounds as well

as the negative impact on landscape, development of odours and proliferation of insects

that harm the ecosystem. Another alternative for the management of these wastes is

based on incineration processes involving socio-economic problems and emissions of

toxic gases such as nitrogen oxides, sulphur and other compounds (greenhouse gases).

The Blanca WWTP is surrounded by canned food industries but there are other many

types of industries that generate organic waste susceptible of being used as co-substrate.

Reduction of WWTP energy consumption using the biogas generated in the process

approximately 50% of current energy consumption). In Spain currently, wastewater

treatment is associated with an annual electricity consumption of 2,200 GWh/year and

CO2 emissions to the atmosphere around 6,013,000 tons/year. Extrapolating these

44

values to the European Union result in 10,000 GWh/year and about 27,200,000

CO2tons/year, aggravating the problem of global warming.

Generation of organic sludge usable as fertilizer (Proposal for a directive of April the

30th April 2003 on the application of sewage sludge). WWTP in Spain annually

generates about 67,000 tons of dry matter. In the European Union most of this waste is

sent to landfills or either it is incinerated. The proposed technology will obtain nutrient-

rich sludge coming from the organic fraction of the cosubstrate and the wastewater

without pathogens.

5.4.2) Economic benefits

Ratio €/m3 of treated water: the reduction in the treated water cost ratio has been

analysed starting from the initial values ranging 0.63€/m3 being the targeted objective

0.29 €/m3.

Energy consumption ratio of the installation. It has been analysed the reduction of

the WWTP energy consumption ratio regarding the current value ranging 0.99 Kw/m3

envisaging a 50% decrease.

Energy production ratio, with the current technologies in the WWTP, the production

of electric energy is not possible. The goal is 0.5 Kw/h per Kg. of COD fed as co-

substrate.

Employment generation, The Murcian horticultural production means 13% of the

national production. This is difficult to measure and the unique available data is the

oscillation between the total number of employments in the region per productive

sector.

5.4.3) Social benefits

With the application of this technology within WWTP, it has been possible to attain the

following social benefits:

By reducing the cost of waste water treatment EU citizens can benefit from paying less

for the cost of m3 of treated water.

Obtaining reused water at a lower cost will benefit farmers, industries, municipalities

and other administrations that use these waters for different purposes at a lower cost

compared to the current situation.

Strengthening the agricultural sector, which is currently suffering from a severe

water shortage in the Mediterranean area of the European Union in which agricultural

crops are economically depleted by the lack of water.

Obtaining a sludge which is proper for land application will halt desertification and

recover damaged soils.

45

Increase of the hired staff for the execution and design of the proposed facilities for

the project and its extrapolation to other parts of the EU which will stimulate the labour

market related to WWTP where technology would be implemented within EU.

Economic promotion of different industrial sectors which will notice a substantial

reduction in their costs related to waste treatment as they will be recovered as a by-

product in WWTP, diminishing the costs previously paid as waste management.

Minimizing the impact of waste generated by WWTP as a result of reducing its

production in a percentage of 90% and due to the fact that they do not have to be treated

in landfills or incineration plants.

5.4.4) Replicability, transferability, cooperation

RAMSES is a project that has unified innovation with a strong demonstrative character and

synergy generation with its fundamental objective including design, development,

implementation and integration of a new process in the principal line of the WWTP.

An extensive replicability, transferability and cooperation Annex II has been developed with

all detailed information about this point.

5.4.5) Best Practice lessons

It has been very important to involve all relevant stakeholders in the project. In particular, the

close collaboration with the responsible engineering team in the implementation action has

been essential to get any improvements from the contractor.

An extensive business case has been developed thus an After Life plan with all the detailed

information. Please consult the mentioned annex II and the After LIFE plan for more detailed

information.

5.4.6) Innovation and demonstration value

The innovation and demonstration values have been represented in the following project

aspects:

The new developed process in the principal line of the WWTP can be also deployed

in any of the EU´s 3.600 WWTPs (requirements to have a treatment plant for each

core population of over 15,000 people, it means around 3.600 WWTP in Europe).

It has been demonstrated that the LIFE RAMSES project improves the quality of

treated water.

It has been possible to increase the value of organic waste coming from nearby

industries.

For more detailed information please consult the Annex II “Answers to the questions raised in

previous reports and monitoring visits”.

46

6) Key Project-level Indicators

Final actual values of the KPIs have been introduced in the online KPI database

(https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/eproposalWeb/kpi) considering environmental, economic and

social benefits reported in the preceding section.

One of the most important conclusions obtained from KPI analysis is the optimal results

achieved in terms of energy reduction, water quality and sludge, as well as reuse of the

produced water. These figures will be an important attraction for future customers, so the

RAMSES prototype will be part of the product portfolio of the company.

On the other hand, ESAMUR, who is responsible of the maintenance of the wastewater

treatment plants in the region of Murcia, have already confirmed the intention to include in

short-term the prototype in scenarios with similar climates and which are closely to food

industries due to the possibility to employ its wastes as co-substrates.

It is important to note that the use of recovered water with the process can be used not only for

irrigation in agriculture but also for aquifers, irrigation of golf courses and employment for

other non-potable irrigation systems.

Finally, it is remarkable that not only good results have been obtained at technical level, but

also in transversal indicators such as networking activities or awareness-raising actions; both at

short and long-term, which represent the long-term sustainability and success of the project.

Further information can be found in Annex III: KPI evaluation.

Both, for ACCIONA Agua and ESAMUR, the development and the successful results obtained

in this project will involve a huge Marketing campaign from now on in order to increasing the

number of clients interested in the solution proposed.

https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/eproposalWeb/kpi

final report covering the project … · 2018-12-20 · final report covering the project...

Documents