a submerged attached growth bioreactor (sagb) and membrane ... · a submerged attached growth...
TRANSCRIPT
A Submerged Attached GrowthBioreactor (SAGB) And Membrane
Filtration For Water Reuse
Philip B. Pedros, Ph.D., P.E.Andrew R. McBrearty, P.E.
Wallace W. Bruce
Agenda
• Introduction• Description of Process• Performance• Costs• Conclusions
Introduction
• Less land for development aroundmetropolitan areas
• Concerns regarding available land– Undesirable topography– Proximity to wetlands or other
environmental sensitive areas– Lack of public water and/or wastewater
Introduction
• The Jefferson at Bellingham (JPI) impactedby all factors– 300 unit, luxury apartment complex on 17 acres– 54,000 gpd
• Development is 3,400 ft. upgradient from publicwater supplies
• Effluent to meet Massachusetts reuse standards
Introduction• Massachusetts DEP Guidelines for
Reuse– 3 Categories for reuse
• Spray irrigation• Toilet flushing• Indirect aquifer recharge
Indirect aquifer recharge applied to JPI
Introduction
• The Most stringent discharge limit appliedEffluent Characteristic Discharge LimitationsBOD5 ≤10 mg/lTotal Suspended Solids ≤5 mg/lTotal Nitrogen ≤10 mg/lMedian Fecal 0 col/100 mlTurbidity ≤2 NTU
• Phosphorus limit < 1 mg/l also included
Design
• For biological nutrient removal (BNR)– Submerged attached growth bioreactor SAGB
• For fecal coliform & turbidity– Hollow fiber microfiltration
Process
• SAGB - media sumerged in processflow
• Advantages– no separate solids separation process– high concentration of viable biomass– small reactor volume required to treat a
given waste stream
Process
• Main reactor designed to achieve– biological oxidation of carbonaceous matter
and nitrogen removal– solids separation
• Intermittent aeration• Secondary (polishing reactor)
– Enhanced denitrification– Chemical removal of phosphorus
Main SAGB
Amphidromefinalweb.exe
Process Flow Schematic
MethanolAluminum Chlorohydrate
SAGB
Polishing Filter
MF & UV
SAGB
Dual Reactors - Common Wall Construction40,000 gpd
U-Block Underdrain15,000 to 200,000 gpd
(under construction)
U-Block Underdrain (completed)
Microfiltration
Hollow Fiber MembranePVDFFlow outside to insidePore size 0.1 microns
Capital Cost
• Equipment cost $ 390,625.00• Total cost $1,350,000.00
Performance - Flow
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
5/28/05 9/5/05 12/14/05 3/24/06 7/2/06 10/10/06 1/18/07
Date
Flo
w(g
allo
ns/d
ay)
Average Flow = 16,440 gpd
Performance - Total N
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
12.0
14.0
May-05 Sep-05 Dec-05 Mar-06 Jul-06 Oct-06 Jan-07
Date
Eff
luen
tT
otal
Nit
roge
n(m
g/l)
Average = 3.6 mg/l Median = 3.45 mg/l
Performance - BOD
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
May-05 Sep-05 Dec-05 Mar-06 Jul-06 Oct-06 Jan-07
Date
Eff
luen
tBO
D5
(mg/
l)
Average = 7.2 mg/l Median = 3.9 mg/l
Performance - BOD
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
Oct-05 Dec-05 Feb-06 Mar-06 May-06 Jul-06 Aug-06
Date
Eff
luen
tBO
D5
(mg/
l) BOD5 Nitrate
mg COD/mgNO3--N = 6-9
Performance Phosphorus
• Multiple point injection• Total P < 1.0 mg/l• Molar ratio (Al/P) 2.0 - 2.5
State relaxed effluent value to < 2 mg/l
Performance
• Weekly fecal coliform tests– non detect
• Quarterly virus tests• (Total Virus and MS2-Phage)
– non detect
State removed virus testing
Performance - Electrical
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
Dec-05 Feb-06 Mar-06 May-06 Jul-06 Aug-06 Oct-06
Date
Pow
er(K
W-h
rs/d
ay)
Average: 207 KW-hrs/dayCost: $684/month $8,325/year
Performance - Electrical
$0.00
$0.50
$1.00
$1.50
$2.00
12/14/05 3/24/06 7/2/06 10/10/06 1/18/07
Date
Pow
erC
ost(
$/10
00ga
l.)
Average cost = $1.33/1,000 gallons
Annual Operating Cost
• O & M $ 48,000.00• Electrical $ 8,325.00• Methanol $ 3,425.00• Al Chlorohydrate $ 8,220.00• Total $ 67,970.00
Conclusions
• SAGB/MF process effective for lowtotal nitrogen and 0 fecal coliform
• Intermittent aeration reduces energyconsumption
• Low visual impact of system–BNR process underground
Conclusions
• Increase recycle from 1 to 2 or 3–Reduce aeration–Reduce methanol
Questions
• Thank you!
Comparison of Electrical
$0.00
$0.50
$1.00$1.50$2.00
$2.50$3.00
$3.50
$4.00
Dec-05 Feb-06 Mar-06 May-06 Jul-06 Aug-06 Oct-06 Nov-06 Jan-07
Date
Cos
t($
/100
0ga
l.)
MBRSAGB/MF
MBR $3.27/1,000 gal-daySAGB/MF $1.33/1,000 gal-day
Biomass11,508
7,265
1,0231,449
13,925 14,040
551668
6,6295,684 6,566
8,513
11,520
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
16,000
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
Filter Depth (m)
Bio
mas
sDry
Wei
ght
(mg/
l)
VLAS - High Flow
VAS - High Flow
VLAS - Medium Flow
VAS - Medium Flow
VLAS - Low Flow
VAS - Low Flow
12,531
15,374 14,452
7,296 6,039 7,117
7,6609,163
12,124
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
16,000
18,000
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2
Filter Depth (m)
Dry
Wei
ght
Con
cetr
atio
n-V
S-(m
g/l)
High Flow
Medium Flow
Low Flow
• Dry mass of biofilm– VLAS– VAS– VSS within
interstitial volumewas negligible
• 7,000 - 15,000 mg/l
Design at JPI Bellingham
Anoxic Equalization Tank