8th IWA Specialist Group Conference on Waste

Stabilization Ponds
.

2nd Latin-American Conference on Waste Stabilization Ponds

Round Table
Integration of ponds with other systems

Belo Horizonte, April 2009

Carlos Augusto de Lemos Cherncharo

Department of Sanitary and Environmental Engineering
Federal University of Minas Gerais Belo Horizonte - Brazil

Brazilian and developing countries:

Enormous sanitation deficit
Shortage of financial resources
Lack of qualified operational personal
Need of low cost, sustainable and simplified
wastewater treatment systems
Large pieces of flat land are not always available
Soil characteristics many times inappropriate for large
natural systems, such as ponds and constructed
wetlands
Reuse still in early stages

Based on that scenario:

Quality of treated effluent is mainly regulated
considering discharge and receiving body standards
Compact anaerobic treatment systems can play a
major role:
UASB reactor is a very good alternative
Two process combinations have very interesting
features:
UASB + Polishing Ponds (PP)
UASB + Trickling Filters (TF)

Summary
Brief background on UASB reactors
Examples of full-scale applications
Drawbacks and possible improvements
Integration with Polishing Ponds
Integration with Trickling Filters
Final remarks

Brief background on
UASB reactors

Anaerobic systems: general aspects

Advantages

Applicability

No oxygen consumption

Simple to operate

Large urban
areas

Low sludge production

Lower O&M costs

Main characteristics

Sludge is more concentrated

and easy to dewater

Lower construction costs

Biogas production

Possibility of energy
recovery

Brief background on UASB reactors

Small
communities

Small
decentralized
systems

UASB Reactor

The system is self-mixed by the upflow movement of biogas bubbles

and by the liquid through the reactor, allowing the contact between the
organic matter and the biomass. As a result, biogas is formed.
Brief background on UASB reactors

UASB Reactor

The 3-phase separator is located in the upper part of the reactor,

allowing the separation of gas, liquid and solids
Brief background on UASB reactors

UASB Reactor

The settling zone allows the exit of the clarified effluent and the return
of solids (biomass) to the digestion zone, in lower part of the reactor
Brief background on UASB reactors

UASB Reactor

The UASB reactor functions, simultaneously, as a primary settler, as a

biological reactor, as secondary clarifier and as sludge digester
Brief background on UASB reactors

UASB Reactor Typical configurations

Brief background on UASB reactors

Examples of full-scale
applications

Itabira WWTP

Location: Itabira Brazil

Configuration: UASB reactors + TF

Design population: 60,000 inhabitants

Design flowrate: 120 L/s (1st stage)

Examples of full-scale applications

Itabira WWTP

Sludge withdrawal and sampling ports

Examples of full-scale applications

Itabira WWTP

Feed distribution system and 3-phase separator

Examples of full-scale applications

Itabira WWTP

Biogas flare and thermal sludge treatment device

Examples of full-scale applications

Ona WWTP

Location: Belo Horizonte Brazil

Configuration: UASB reactors + TF

Design population: 1 million inhabitants

Design flowrate: 1.8 m3/s (1st stage)

Aerial view
Examples of full-scale applications

Ona WWTP

Aerial view
Examples of full-scale applications

Ona WWTP

Feed distribution system (top of the reactor)

Examples of full-scale applications

Ona WWTP

Feed distribution system (bottom of the reactor)

Examples of full-scale applications

Ona WWTP

3-phase separator
Examples of full-scale applications

Ona WWTP

Biogas system
Examples of full-scale applications

Drawbacks and
possible improvements

Anaerobic systems: inherent limitations

Corrosion

Odour
generation

Scum

Foam

Limited
efficiency

Methane
emission

Most of all are possible to control, with proper designs &

adequate construction, operation and maintenance

Drawbacks and possible improvements

Inherent limitations: corrosion

Proper materials

Corrosion

Proper lining
Turbulence minimization
Turbulence maximization

Drawbacks and possible improvements

Inherent limitations: Odour

Turbulence minimization
Liquid
phase

Turbulence maximization
Aerobic post-treatment

Odour

Reactor cover
Gaseous
phase

Gas collection
Gas treatment
Gas flare

Drawbacks and possible improvements

Inherent limitations: Scum

The problem
Removal device
Scum

Treatment and final disposal

Minimize formation
Ongoing researches

Drawbacks and possible improvements

Inherent limitations: Foam

The problem
Control of household discharges
Foam
Turbulence minimization
Aerobic post-treatment

Drawbacks and possible improvements

Inherent limitations: Limited efficiency

Compliance with local guidelines ?

(ex.: dilution, agricultural reuse etc.)

Limited
efficiency

Post-treatment for the removal of carbon

and pathogens (well established)
Post-treatment for the removal of N and P
(research still needed)
Improvement of anaerobic effluent quality
(Ongoing research)

Drawbacks and possible improvements

Inherent limitations: Methane emission

The problem
Micro-aeration inside the reactor?

Methane
emission

Stripping outside the reactor?

Biological oxidation?

Drawbacks and possible improvements

UASB technology: summary

Consolidated technology in many warm-climate
regions
Great advantages and broad application, but
operational limitations still exist
Further expansion and wider application can be
significantly hindered if design and operational
drawbacks are not solved

Drawbacks and possible improvements

Integration with
Polishing Ponds

UASB reactor + Polishing Ponds: typical flowsheet

Integration with Polishing Ponds

UASB reactor + Polishing Ponds: Experimental Units

Location: Centre for Research and Training on Sanitation UFMG/COPASA
Design population: 250 inhabitants
Design flowrate: 1.6 m3/h

Integration with Polishing Ponds

Performance regarding organic matter and solids

COD

180 mg/L

Operational conditions:
- HRT: 10 to 13 days
TSS

- H: 0.60 to 0.80 m

60 mg/L

Integration with Polishing Ponds

Performance regarding ammonia and E. coli

NH3
20 mg/L

Operational conditions:
- HRT: 10 to 13 days
E. coli

- H: 0.60 to 0.80 m

103 MPN/100 mL

Integration with Polishing Ponds

UASB + PP system: summary

UASB reactor: main unit responsible for organic
matter removal
Ponds: responsible for excellent coliform and good
ammonia removals
Coarse filter: decreases algal concentration, thus
leading to complementary BOD and SS removal
Area required is large: 2 3 m2/inhabitant
Total HRT is lower than in most natural treatment
systems

Integration with Polishing Ponds

Integration with
Trickling Filters

UASB reactor + Trickling Filter: typical flowsheet

Integration with Trickling Filters

Compact UASB + Trickling Filter System:

Experimental Units
Location: Centre for Research and Training on Sanitation UFMG/COPASA
Design population: 500 inhabitants
Design flowrate: 3.2 m3/h

Integration with Trickling Filters

Compact UASB + Trickling Filter System:

Experimental Units

Integration with Trickling Filters

Trickling Filter with different types of packing media

Location: Centre for Research and Training on Sanitation UFMG/COPASA
Design population: 400 inhabitants
Design flowrate: 2.6 m3/h

Individualized compartments

Integration with Trickling Filters

Full-scale UASB + TF system: Itabira Minas Gerais

Integration with Trickling Filters

Performance regarding organic matter and solids

Concentraes de DBO total (mg/L) - efluente UASB e decantadores FBP
90

BOD

80
70

60 mg/L

60

Concentraes de DQO total (mg/L) - efluente UASB e decantadores

450

COD

400
350
300

50

250

40

200

30

150

20

100

10

50

0
UASB Escria

anel

DHS Condute

180 mg/L

0
UASB Escria

Anel

DHS Condute

Concentraes de SST (mg/L) - efluentes UASB e decantadores FBPs

260

TSS

240
220
200
180

Operational conditions:

160
140
120
100
80

60 mg/L

60

Average temperature: 250C

HLR: 20 m.m-2.d
OLR 0.43 kgBOD.m-3.d-1

40
20
0
UASB Escria

anel

DHS Condute

Integration with Trickling Filters

Performance regarding ammonia removal

NH3

NH3
20 mg/L

20 mg/L

Operational conditions:

Operational conditions:

Average temperature: 230C

HLR: 10 m.m-2.d-1
OLR 0.38 kgBOD.m-3.d-1

Average temperature: 250C

HLR: 10 m.m-2.d
OLR 0.24 kgBOD.m-3.d-1

Integration with Trickling Filters

Performance regarding anionic surfactants

LAS

LAS

2 mg/L

2 mg/L

Operational conditions:

Operational conditions:

Average temperature: 230C

HLR: 20 m.m-2.d-1
OLR 0.43 kgBOD.m-3.d-1

Average temperature: 250C

HLR: 10 m.m-2.d
OLR 0.24 kgBOD.m-3.d-1

Integration with Trickling Filters

UASB + TF system: summary

UASB reactor: main unit responsible for organic
matter removal
TF: complementary BOD and SS removal
TF: poor coliform removal
TF: good ammonia removal can be accomplished, but
surface area and depth should be increased
Very compact system: ~ 0.1 m2/inhabitant

Drawbacks and possible improvements

Final remarks

Critical and important aspects in the selection

of alternatives for wastewater treatment in
developed and developing regions
Developed countries Developing countries
Efficiency
Reliability
Sludge disposal
Land requirements
Environmental impacts
Operational costs
Construction costs
Sustainability
Simplicity
critical

Important

Important

critical

adapted from von Sperling, 1996

Selection criteria for developed and developing countries

Relative comparison of UASB/PP and

UASB/TF treatment methods

Economy

Lower possibility of
environmental problems

Removal efficiency

Treatment
Sustain Simplicity
Relisystem Requirements
ability in O&M
ability Bad
Costs
Insects
Noise Aerosol
Nutrients
Coliforms
BOD
Land Energy Constr. O & M
odours
worms
UASB + PP

UASB + TF ++++

+++++

++/++++

++++

+++++

++++

++++

+++

+++++

++++

+++

+++++ +++++

++

++++

+++

+++

++++

+++

+++++

++/+++

++

++++

++

++++

+++

++++

+++++: most favourable

+: least favourable ++++, +++, ++: intermediate grades, in decreasing order
+ / +++++: variable with land and soil characteristics

Both alternatives are very attractive for treating

domestic wastewater in developing countries

Thanks for your attention

Scum accumulation on settling compartment

Scum accumulation inside the 3-phase separator

H2S and CH4 control in large WWTP

Biogas

Cogeneration of heat and electricity

Biogas: micro-aeration

Waste gas
Biogas
treatent

Fun

Heat

Electricity
Biofilter
Biofiltro

COD balance in UASB reactors treating

domestic wastewater
Best situation
Conversion to
biomass
21%
Used for
sulfate
reduction
4%
Losses with
the gaseous
phase
5%
Conversion to
CH4 and loss
with the liquid
phase
8%

Conversion to
CH4 and
recovery as
biogas
64%

COD balance in UASB reactors treating

domestic wastewater
Worst situation
Conversion to
biomass
21%

Conversion to
CH4 and
recovery as
biogas
23%

Used for
sulfate
reduction
16%

Losses with
the gaseous
phase
5%

Conversion to
CH4 and loss
with the liquid
phase
36%

H2S and CH4 control in small WWTP

Biogas

Biogas
Flare

Effluent saturated with CH4

Waste gas from preliminary treatment

Waste gas

Fun

Biofilter
Biofiltro

Degasified
effluent