Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Date of Submission,
Name of Lecturer,
Reference ......................................................................................................................................... 18
List of Tables
i
1.0 Introduction
Coffee, which comes from the genus Coffea of Rubiaceae family, is among the
worlds most popular beverages consumed [1]. In 2013, Malaysia was ranked 45th in the top
50 coffee consuming countries in the world with 1.3 kg coffee consumed per capita (per
person on average) [2]. Coffee is processed either through the wet or dry method. Wet
processing method is often desirable because of the superior quality of coffee produced as
compared to the dry method. The wet method involves the use of mechanical removal of pulp
with the aid of water and this generates a large amount of wastewater [1]. It has been
estimated that 4045 L of wastewater are produced per kilogram of coffee [3]. A usual
coffee-curing or coffee-processing industrial wastewater has a dark brown colour with
chemical oxygen demand (COD) in the range of 6,000 mg/L to about 11,000 mg/L and a
biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) of 3,000 mg/L to 5,000 mg/L. The characteristics of the
wastewater may vary depending on the processing and type of coffee beans. The major
organic compounds usually found in coffee-curing wastewater includes tannins, sucrose,
caffeine, chlorogenic and quinic acids, trigonelline and nicotinic acids, lipids and alkaloids
with minute amounts of cholesterol proteins. Of the organic compounds mentioned, tannins,
humic acid, humates (degraded products of lignin), caffeine, chlorogenic acids, nicotinic
acids, alkaloids and a few other organics are responsible for the colour of wastewater [4].
Washing Effluent
1
The processes of curing and wastewater source are depicted partially in Figure 1 above. The
organics escape conventional biological treatment processes and as they degrade very
gradually, they tend to remain in the receiving water bodies and can cause harmful effects to
the surroundings. Thus, it is imperative that these organics are removed from the wastewater
prior to disposal to ensure no pollution of the environment is caused [4].
The following tables indicate the parameter values for the incoming raw wastes.
2
Suspended solids (mg/L) 100.0 60.0 111.0 22.0
COD (mg/L) 200.0 8000.0 14000.0 4600.0
Oil & grease (mg/L) 10.0 50.0 150.0 ND
Colour (ADMI) 200 2000 3700 3000
Iron (mg/L) 5.00 9.82 9.64 > Standard B Range
Phenol (mg/L) 1.00 1.7 1.7 > Standard B Range
3
Figure 3: Side view of the existing treatment system.
4
2.0 Objectives
We intend to review the available information on how the exisiting wastewater
treatment system works in Company XYZ. In this proposal, after reviewing the available
information and proposing improvements on the treatment systems, we hope to achieve the
following two goals:
1. Ensuring the effluent wastewater from Company XYZ meets all specifications of
Standard B in the Environmental Quality Act (EQA), 1974.
2. Ensuring the implemented treatment improvements are effective and affordable.
Translation of the flow sheet above denotes the usage of screening sieves, settling tank (also
interchangeably called sedimentation tank or clarifier), electrochemical oxidation process,
neutralization tank and two different activated carbon sand beds.
5
3.1 Justification of Proposed Alternative/Solution
The proposed solution above is finalized based on criteria such as efficiency of waste
removal (with comparisons to the existing treatment system), cost effectiveness of the
alternative chosen, limitation of space in the waste treatment area, by-product value of waste
treatment and return of investments. The mentioned criteria and their detailed explanations
would serve as a guideline to the overall feasibility of the proposed alternative as illustrated
in Figure 4.
6
surges to physical-chemical treatment systems and permit chemical feed rates compatible
with feeding equipment [5]. The equalization basin in talk is implemented in an in-line
equalization basis. This proves true for the existing treatment system and no modifications
are made to the basin. The efficiency of equalization remains. The equalization basin is also
proposed to be made as a makeshift sedimentation tank. The equalization basin is deemed to
hold two days worth of raw incoming wastewater with a regulated amount leaving the unit
for further treatment. An opportunity is determined here to consider the basin a makeshift
sedimentation tank. Suspended solids that somehow passed through the screening sieves
could be composed of some settleable solids. This settleable solids form silt and sediment
down the bed of the basin. This further removes suspended solids though not considerably
high due to the fact that suspended solids that escaped the screening sieves are much smaller
and discrete in size giving rise to the possibility of more non-settleable solids as compared to
the settleable solids. However still, more suspended solids are removed to an extent. The
efficiency of equalization remains with respect to flow of wastewater.
7
12.86 kWh.kg-1 COD is obtained. The energy consumption is reduced by about 37% as
compared to when using pH 9 [4]. Coming back to context of our solution, a 95% removal of
colour can be obtained using electrochemical oxidation. A 95% removal rate of colour in the
effluent stream should arise within the Standard B range or just above the recommended
limits. However, it must be noted that this is the first actual chemical treatment of the
wastewater. Though, the colour limits are still above range by a minimal amount (285 ADMI
after 95% removal of colour for sum of Day 1 and Day 2), there are still a few more units
leading to the final discharge. The units will be explained in more detail in the following
sections. The pH of the raw wastewater entering the process is around pH 3.4. This correlates
well with the experimental conditions mentioned above. A 78% COD removal can be
obtained. This indicates an amount of 5,500 mg/L still in effluent treatment process.
However, as mentioned above, there are still a few more units leading to the final discharge.
8
3.1.1.6 Activated Carbon Sand Bed 2
The second sand bed in this proposed treatment process will utilize activated carbon made of
Avocado Seed Carbon (ASC). A study done estimated the efficiency of COD and BOD
removal from coffee processing wastewater at 98.28% and 99.19% respectively [7]. Thus,
this technique may be a good option to remove all remaining COD and BOD in the
wastewater. Results of the study mentioned above showed that at 70 minutes contact time, a
pH of 7 and particle size of adsorbent less than 0.75mm, the conditions were optimum for the
ASC to remove almost all the amounts of BOD and COD in the wastewater [7]. In the
context of our proposed solution, the second sand bed with ASC in it will allow removal of
colour, BOD and COD to a large extent. This renders all the parameters in the wastewater
treatment unit within recommended levels.
For the case of phenol and iron content, phenol is associated with the presence of tannins.
Tannins are one of the organics that give rise to the dark brownish colour in wastewater [4].
The electrochemical oxidation and subsequent sand beds are proposed to have removed most
of the colour in the wastewater, which directly indicates flavonoids and tannins, consequently
removing most of the phenols in the wastewater. Most of the iron content in the wastewater is
also removed with the usage of sand beds, especially the second bed. Iron is adsorbed faster
and preferentially onto the carbon medium as compared to manganese and fluoride for
instance [8]. The percentage of removal of iron from wastewater is about 99.02% using
granular activated carbons (GAC) [9]. The final iron content in the treated effluent seem to be
well within the Standard B range as recommended. It is safe to say that the ASC incorporated
in the final part of the treatment system acts as the sweeping mechanism to remove all
remaining iron, phenol, BOD, COD and colour content in the wastewater.
9
For the re-positioning of the screening sieves, the original treatment system had the physical
treatment process just before the effluent enters the sand bed. The proposed solution
incorporates the physical treatment process as the initiating process of the wastewater
treatment system. As the number of screening sieves data werent provided for the existing
treatment system, a few assumptions are made. The assumptions are as follows:
There is more than 1 screening sieve in the existing treatment system to remove
suspended solids.
The number of sieves in the proposed solution is the same as the number in the existing
treatment process.
The modification made was re-aligning the screening sieves retractable for cleaning as
illustrated in the figure below.
The costs conjured for this modification would be the capital cost of constructing the cement
housing of the screening sieves.
10
Capital Cost Calculations:
, 2 = (0.914 1.219) = 1.1142 = 11.99 2
Assuming construction costs inclusive labor hours = 30.00 2
Price of construction = .
For the usage of electrochemical oxidation reactor, the existing treatment system bypasses the
feed wastewater from the equalization basin to the sand bed. The proposed solution uses the
already built reactor and converts it into a electrochemical oxidation reactor.
No capital costs are required for the electrochemical oxidation reactor operation as there is
already an existing reactor unused. The only costs out of this process are the operational costs
of replacing the anodes for the process and electricity usage for the electrochemical
oxidation. Steel anodes can be used for efficient treatment of the coffee wastewater for its
colour and organic removal. The use of steel anodes cost significantly less and is an
economical option [4].
11
Energy consumption at pH 3 is 12.86 kWh.kg-1 COD.
Taking 8-hour factory operation for 350 days a year from existing data.
350
Total energy consumed = 12.86 8 = 36,008 .
1
For the addition of the neutralization tank, the costs conjured for this modification would be
the capital cost of constructing the neutralization tank and operating costs of the calcium
oxide bases.
For the usage of activated carbon in the second sand bed, the price of the ASC used is
dependent on the transportation and processing costs only. The raw material discarded is
available at no costs thus the overall price of the activated carbon is tremendously dropped.
However, avocado arent native fruit trees in Malaysia and thus, the shipping costs to obtain
the ASC will be a costly one.
12
Operational Cost Calculations:
The price of ASC per kg: RM 60.00.
Assuming 26kg of ASC are used per year similar to the first sand bed.
Cost of ASC per year is RM40, 560.00.
*The calculation of total costs for the existing system alone (commercial activated carbon in
the first sand bed) is the same as calculating operational costs for ASC consumption per year
except that the price for the existing systems commercial activated carbon is RM12.00 per
kg.
**A 25% allowance is introduced to allow miscellaneous costs incurred for other processes
uncounted.
Based on the above calculations, the proposed system is within the allocated budget of
Company XYZ to perform the improvement on the treatments. Thus, this criteria is fulfilled
in terms of cost effectiveness.
13
3.1.3 Limitation of Space In The Waste Treatment Area
The area provided for the waste treatment process is only a mere 10m by 10m. This
corresponds to an area of 100m2 only.
Based on the proposed solution, the only hassle with the alternative as compared to the
existing treatment system would be the incorporation of the screening sieves, the
neutralization tanks and the activated carbon sand bed 2.
Sedimentation
Tank/Equalization Sand Bed 2 Treated
Basin effluent
Electrochemical
Oxidation Reactor
Screening Sieves
*Not up to scale. Boundaries of the square box outside represent 10m by 10m.
14
The above illustration depicts that the allocated 100m2 is more than enough to house the
additional units of the proposed solution. The length and width of the allocated area allows
the utilization of space for the neutralization tanks.
The following table lists the dimensions of each vessel and its dimensions.
Based on the reviewed spacing available, it is feasible to implement the proposed solution in
the above-mentioned manner.
An income is made with the selling of by-products of the coffee wastewater treatment
process.
15
3.1.5 Returns of Investments
To make amends for the improvement costs established, the recycle of treated water is carried
out. According to a case study in Guatemala, recycling treated water into the coffee
producing treatment process reduces the expenditure for water consumption by 90%.
Assuming that Company XYZ is situated in Penang, the following standards are used.
Taking 90% of the total raw coffee wastewater being made up of water. That much of water
(4035.15m3) is needed to wash off cherries in the roasting process and produce 4,483.5m3 of
coffee wastewater in Company XYZ per year.
The cost needed to pay per year for such an amount of water is RM 5,245.695.
Recycling reduces the amount of water needed by a tenth of the initial amount and Company
XYZ only needs to pay RM524.7 per year.
, =
/
2, 878.00
, = = 0.2886
( 5, 250.00 + 4, 721.13)
= .
Based on the calculated figures, we can observe that the capital costs can be returned back by
savings due to by-product sales and water recycling in 3.5 months. This is provided the
operating costs are maintained and sustained without hassle according to yearly budget.
16
4.0 Conclusion
In conclusion, the proposed solution is able to remove all the parameter values to within the
recommended ranges of Standard B. The cost effectiveness and returns of investment were
studied as well. The figure below shows a summary of our proposed solution with each units
respective removal efficiency. With the mentioned justifications and reasons, we hope that
our proposal is considered and accepted by Company XYZ.
Screening Removal of
suspended
Sieves solids.
Dampening of
Sedimentation flow rates.
Tank/Equalizat Removal of
ion Basin suspended
solids.
Electrochemical Removal of
Oxidation colour, COD
Reactor & BOD.
Removal of
Sand Bed 1 oil &
grease.
Neutralization Reduction
Tank of acidity.
Removal of
colour, COD,
Sand Bed 2 BOD, iron &
phenol.
17
Reference
International.
biodegradability of the wastewater of the humid benefit the coffee. Interciencia, 2000.
25: p. 386-390.
4. Rajesh, S.B., K.S. Lokesh, and T.P.H. Gowda, Colour and organic removal of
6. Mahesh, S., et al., Electrochemical Degradation of Pulp and Paper Mill Wastewater.
7. Devi, R., V. Singh, and A. Kumar, COD and BOD reduction from coffee processing
1853-1860.
8. Siabi, W.K., Potential of activated carbon for manganese and iron removal, in 29th
9. Goher, M.E., et al., Removal of aluminum, iron and manganese ions from industrial
wastes using granular activated carbon and Amberlite IR-120H. The Egyptian
18