six projects evaluating different techniques to … projects evaluating different techniques to...

Six projects evaluating different techniques to reduce pharmaceuticals

2016-04-13 Margareta Lundin Unger Havs- och vattenmyndigheten 1


• Systems for the purification of pharmaceutical residues and other priority persistent substances

• RESVAV• FRAM• Pharmaceuticals in blackwater and fecal sludge • Knivsta• Ozone and MBBR

2016-04-13 Presentationsnamn Namn 2

Project presentation

Partners

Funding

Systems for the purification of pharmaceutical residues and other

priority persistent substances(Systemförslag för rening av läkemedelsrester och andra prioriterade svårnedbrytbara ämnen)

and project partners own contribution

Expected benefits

4

Most sustainable solution for different WWTPs(Ready for implementation but flexible for future adaptation)

Environmental impact (LCA)

Process knowledge & understanding

(current and future)

Costs (CAPEX, OPEX)

Project implementation

ProjectWP1

CompilationState‐of‐the‐art

WP2New and improved analytical methods

WP3Survey at WWTPs

WP4Evaluation of various

treatment technologies

WP5Ecotoxicity at

ozonation or not?

WP6Compilation of

system alternatives

WP7Enviro. and cost impacts assessments (LCA/LCC)

WP8Preparation for implementation

WP9Dissemination

5

ContactProject manager

IVL Swedish Environmental Research InstituteChristian Baresel,

[email protected], +46-10-788 6606

6

www.ivl.se; report B2226www.svensktvatten.se; report C IVL2015-B2226

RESVAVRening av svårnedbrytbara ämnen från avloppsvatten


The goal and the project partners

• Guidelines and design criteria for upgrading of Swedish wastewater treatment plants, either with ozon or activated carbon

• Cost estimations



Finding suitable process solutions

PC DNAS SC SF RecipientIN

Sludge treatment

SeparationPrimary clarifier (PC)

Secondary clarifier (SC)Sand filter (SF)

Bio-reactorsNitrifying Activated Sludge (NAS)

Denitrifying Activated Sludge (DNAS)

NAS

Agriculture

Ozone



Full-scale experiences

• Options, problems, experiences and key figuresfrom Germany and Switzerland



Pilot trials

Monitorering and Åtgärder av Läkemedel i UNESCO Biosfärsområde

Kristianstads Vattenrike and Hanöbukten

Erland Björklund & Ola SvahnForskargruppen i Analytisk Kemi

FRAM-projektet

OsbyReningsverk

Diclofenac

1. Sandfilter

2. Kolfilter

Renat m.aktivt kol

Start 150519 1 month operation, ca 2000 m3 purified water

Degree of purification %

Riktigt rent vatten

Pharmaceuticals in blackwater and fecal sludge

Results

Higher concentration in blackwater and fecal sludge than in influent to WWTPs.

Comparable levels of pharmaceutical in treated blackwater (liquid composting and ammonia treatment) and sludge from WWTPs when fertilized on fields.

BASL4 simulering

Thank you for listening!

[email protected]

Pharmaceuticals in blackwater and fecal sludge

Knivsta STP

10000 PE200m3/hOzonation

Evaluation of advanced wastewater treatment in full scale


• Practical experience and cost estimates of full-scale ozonation

• Estimate removal efficiencies for 120 pharmaceuticals

• Study effects in the environment including ecological status before, during and after

• Four year project, 2014-2017


2014 2015 2016 2017

Procurement, building phase

Fullscale ozonation

Sampling

Analysis


Berndt BjörleniusTomas BrodinJerker FickJoakim LarssonLeif Norrgren

Christian Baresel, Robert Sehlén, Mats Ek, Jonas Malmborg

Ozone & MBBR – from pilot to full scale

Water and Pharmaceuticals –insights and perspectives for health and environment

Why an additional treatment in Linköping? Substance

EC (µg/L)

NOEC(µg/L)

Safety factor

Dilution in recipient EC/PNEC

Hig

h ri

sk

Oxazepam 0.30 1.8 1000 27 6.3Metoprolol 3.09 1 50 27 5.7Estrone* <0.023 0.008 100 27 2.3Trimetoprim 0.14 0.29 100 27 1.9Ethinylestradiol* <0.158 0.00003 10 27 1.2

Mod

erat

e

Estradiol <0.146 0.0004 10 27 0.9Propanolol 0.13 0.5 50 27 0.5Levonorgestrel* <0.432 0.0008 10 27 0.5Diclofenac 0.48 0.5 10 27 0.4Amlodipine 0.09 10 1000 27 0.3Carbamazepine 0.57 1 10 27 0.2Fluoxetin 0.01 0.029 10 27 0.1

Low

ris

kParacetamol 0.26 30 100 27 0.03Estriol* <0.08 0.075 10 27 0.02Koffein 11.63 1000 50 27 0.02Furosemide 0.78 142 100 27 0.02Naproxen 0.33 32 50 27 0.02Ciprofloxacin 0.06 1.2 10 27 0.02Citalopram 0.30 105 100 27 0.01Ibuprofen 0.28 10 10 27 0.01Atenolol 2.39 1000 100 27 0.01Tetracycline 0.05 310 1000 27 0.01Sertraline 0.03 9 50 27 0.01

* For ethinylestradiol and Levonorgestrel EC 0.1 ng/L was used. For estradiol EC 1 ng/L. For estrone and estriol EC 5 ng/L

Removal priority list from screening

Risk ratio = EC/PNEC

EC ‐ Environmental ConcentrationPNEC ‐ Predicted No Effect Concentration

∗

NOEC & safety factors based on FASS & Wikipharma database

Average dilution factor = 27

Target: Risk ratio < 1

Overall process design(from Baresel et al., 2015)

Risk ratio at 5 mg O3/L

Results

Substans EC

(µg/L) NOEC (µg/L)

Säkerhets-faktor

UtspädningRecipient

EC/PNEC Kvot

HR

Oxazepam 0,10 1,8 1 000 27 2,0

MR

Metoprolol 0,25 1,0 50 27 0,5Östron <0,023 0,008 100 27 0,13

LR

Etinylöstradiol <0,158 0,00003 10 27 0,07 Östradiol <0,146 0,0004 10 27 0,05 Ciprofloxacin 0,009 0,1 10 27 0,03 Fluoxetin 0,002 0,029 10 27 0,03Levonorgestrel <0,432 0,0008 10 27 0,03Trimetoprim 0,001 0,29 100 27 0,01Ibuprofen 0,14 10 10 27 0,01 HR - Hög risk MR - Måttlig risk LR - Låg risk

• [email protected]• [email protected]

Link to the report: • www.tekniskaverken.se• www.ivl.se & www.hammarbysjostadsverk.se

TACK!

six projects evaluating different techniques to … projects evaluating different techniques to...

Documents