Modelling and operation of nutrient removal in a hybrid process for mixed industrial and municipal effluent

Markku Huhtamki, Juurocon Oy Juurocon.oy@dnainternet.net; mobile +358 40-767 9470 Dipankar Sen, Santa Clara Water Walley District

Content:
IFAS (hybrid) processes for industrial and municipal effluent

Hybrid (IFAS) processes Benefits and drawbacks Key points for successful operation Case Studies, Raisio and Eura Learning from existing installations
- Design, modelling and operation of IFAS processes

Utilisation of industrial effluents

Juurocon Oy, Nordic 2007

Development for IFAS (hybrid) processes

Activated sludge (CAS) MBBR (carriers; no sludge recycle)
Kaldnes, Entex, others

IFAS, fixed bed

E.g. Ringlace, Bioweb, Cleartec (cord) E.g. (sponge)

IFAS, moving bed

E.g. Captor, Linpor (sponge) E.g. KMT, Hydroxyl, Entex; Eimco; Aqwise (plastic)

Juurocon Oy, Nordic 2007

Types of IFAS media

Juurocon Oy, Nordic 2007

Installation examples
- Dispersed media is more common e.g. in Scandinavia; - Fixed-in place media is more common e.g. in USA and Japan

Web type media (Stewart Creek wwtp) Rope type media (Annapolis wwtp)

Dispersed media (Eura wwtp)

Juurocon Oy, Nordic 2007

IFAS-processes - Benefits and drawbacks

Benefits
Improved process stability Quick recovery after shock loads, toxic loads, snow melting periods and maintenance shut downs Improved efficiency (up to >2* compared to CAS and MBBR) Improved sludge settling (SVI)

Drawbacks and prevention of poor operation

Blocking of intermediate screens (in carrier processes); Efficient pre-treatment; selection of carriers and screens Carrier mixing (at high flow or low aeration) Design of aerators and mixers; placing of them Carrier durability (hits of mixer blades; wear towards walls) Component evaluation Excessive growth of biomass & bristle worms may result in poor nitrification Aeration and aeration control
Juurocon Oy, Nordic 2007

Raisio wwtp a 4-stage Bardenpho process;

~20% carriers in all sections except recycle pumping

Untreated food industry effluents speed up nitrification (compared e.g. to methanol) and nitrogen removal. 70% N-tot reduction reached with untreated food ind. effluent (# methanol) Process failures due to mechanical problems (broken screens and carriers) Process failures due to low pH, insufficient carbon source and high TSS in pre-clarified water (often > 1000 mg/l resulting in < 2 d sludge age in MLSS) - More information: www.raisio.fi/ripesca
Bypass
Fe3+ Fe3+

Aver 13000 m3/d 700 kg N-tot/d

Fe2+

Fe3+

D Industrial effluents

D/N

Basins 3600 m3; HRT 5-9 h MLSS 3 g/l; SRT max 8 d

Juurocon Oy, Nordic 2007

Raisio at normal load : NH4-N removal - nitrification and biomass growth

NH4-N removal 99,6% - To primary sludge 20% - To biomass 19 % - Nitrification by biofilm 23% - Nitrification by MLSS 38%
200 180 160 NH4-N Uptake, kg/d 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0
Anox Anox Aer Aer Aer Anox Anox Aer
8 Juurocon Oy, Nordic 2007

T = 9 oC; SRT (MLSS) 8 d O2: 5 mg/l in aeration Untreated food ind. effluent

- Biofilm seeds the free sludge (it nitrifies better than without carriers) - Higher O2 increases biofilm nitrification - This case is sensitive for sludge age of the free sludge

Nitrification Biofilm Nitrification by MLVSS N bound to biomass/ biofilm N bound to biomass/ MLSS

Raisio high TSS after primary clarifier : NH4-N removal by nitrification and biomass growth
Recycle of dead sludge decreases MLSS sludge age - What happens ? T = 9 oC; Pre-clarified TSS 1000 mg/l O2: 5 mg/l in aeration Untreated food ind. effluent - Nitrification by MLSS stops - Nitrification by biofilm reduces, when more of the biofilm fraction is consumed for oxidizing of the BOD - Nitrifiers are retained, but effluent NH4-N increases to 15 20 mg/l

60 50 NH4-N Uptake, kg/d 40 30 20 10 0

Anox Anox Aer Aer Aer

Nitrification Biofilm Nitrification by MLVSS N bound to biomass/ biofilm N bound to biomass/ MLSS

Anox

Anox

Aer

Juurocon Oy, Nordic 2007

Denitrification reaction rate

Often presented as constant rate relative to biomass amount [mg/ NO3-N /(g VSS, h)] does not apply for mixed C-sources Rate is depending on the carbon source (and adaptation) Slightly temperature dependent (1 oC 4%) Soluble oxygen inhibits (high O2 at the end of nitrification; high sludge recycle) At low concentrations (< 3 mg/l) rate is limited The lower redox-potential, the higher denitrification rate
Denitrification rates at 13 - 16 oC
COD mg NO3-N / [mg/l] (g MLSS * h) Acetic acid 1 056 000 3,4 Edogenous respiration 0,2 - 0,6 Food industry wastes Yeast industry 28 800 3,0 Wine industry 210 000 5,4 Slaughterhouse 250 000 1,4 Vegetable processing 26 000 4,3 Kemian teollisuuden jttteet / sivutuotteet Pharmaceutical ind. I 188 000 4,1 Pharmaceutical ind. II 320 000 1,3 Glue production I 280 000 1,0 Photographic industry 690 000 1,6

Denitrification rates 15 oC 2
Wastewater Methanol Ethanol mg NO3-N / (g VSS * h) 0,3 - 2 2 - 5,5 10 - 17

10

Juurocon Oy, Nordic 2007

1) Eckenfielder, W.W. Industrial water pollution control #rd ed. McGraw-Hill 2000 2) Andersson et al., Nitrogen removal from municipal wastewater; TemaNord 1995:580

Carbon sources and denitrification at Raisio.

The need for the anoxic volume depends on denitrification rate
40 35 Nitrate concentration [mg NO 3-N/l]

1,3 mg /(g VSS, h)

30

Treated effluent; VSS 3,3 g/l (endogenous respiration)

0,3 mg /(g VSS, h)

25 20

Methanol; VSS 2,2 g/l

12 mg /(g VSS, h)
15 10 5 0 0:00

3,8 mg /(g VSS, h)

Waste methanol'; VSS 2,2 g/l

Mixed influent incl. untreated food ind. effluent; VSS 2,2 g/l

2,8 mg /(g VSS, h) Test date 18.7.2006 T 20-21 oC; pH 7,0 -8,0
1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 Mixed influent incl. untreated food ind. effluent; Carriers (L2) 100 m2/m3

Test duration [h]

11 Juurocon Oy, Nordic 2007

Carbon source does matter

100% 90% 80% Nitrogen removal vs. BOD/N-relation

Nitrogen reduction

70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 0 5 10 15 20 25

Raisio: pre-treated food ind. effluent; full aerobic; low DO 1.1.2001 - 1.6.2002 Raisio: ~30% by-pass for food ind pre-treatment; DN process 1.8. - 9.12.2002 Raisio: pre-treated food ind. effluent; DN process 27.603 - 30.11.2003 Finnish >10000 pe wwtps reaching 70% nitrogen removal during 1999

Influent BOD7(ATU) /N-tot

12 Juurocon Oy, Nordic 2007

Raisio process related mechanical problems; screens mixing and carries

Maintenance shut downs, problems in sludge dewatering, low alkalinity, malfunction of the primary clarifier, insufficent carbon source, small aerated volume and low carrier filling ratio have limited nitrogen removal and caused unsatisfied results

13

Juurocon Oy, Nordic 2007

Eura wwtp A special solution for local effluents

Rebuilding of an old wwtp for nitrification and also to treat paper industry effluents. Normal flow and load were tripled Municipal effluents partly nitrified in line 1 (R1 R3) using IFAS process Denitrification and oxidation of paper industry effluents in lines 2 & 3 (R4 and R5) A small sludge recycle increases the temperature in line 1 by 5 oC

Paper industry
Qaver = 200 (m3/h); 30 -40 oC Qaver = 100 (m3/h); 4 -16 oC LINE 1 550 m3 HRT 2-12 h R1 R2 R3 Qaver = 50 (m3/h); 5 d/w Biol. pretreatment RAS 30 03-2006 m3/h until LINEs 2&3 (2 pc) (460 +640 =) 1100 m3 HRT 3 h (of which aerobic 58%) R4 RAS 70 ->100 R5 m3/h 03 2006

Me3+

Municipal

RAS = 100 (m3/h); 20-30 oC Before 12 2006 After 12 2006 Sludge treatment

Food Industry

14

Juurocon Oy, Nordic 2007

Case Eura - experiences

High solid concentrations in paper industry effluent. The P&P effluents were not inhibitory, but in this case the pigments coated slowly the nitrifyers in the biofilm of the carriers (resulting in poor nitrification). The noticed coating phenomen was exceptional also for P&P effluents Running line 1 as pure MBBR process improved nitrification. >70% nitrogen removal and < 10 mg/l residual nitrogen was reached during winter 2007 Denitrification was complete in R4 (HRT 1,2 h, biomass 20% of MLSS; SRT 0,8 d * 42% anoxic) Spring 2007: Periodically poor nitrification. After installation of on-line nitrogen measurement on summer 2007, inhibitory effects caused by municipal effluent were detected Modelling and test runs during summer 2007 for further process optimisation: pre-clarification of P&P effluents, recycling of sludge and bypass of the biological pre-treatment at the food industry

15

Juurocon Oy, Nordic 2007

Eura; results during winter 2007

- Partial (~50%) nitrification in line 1 is enough for > 70 % nitrogen removal and low residual N-tot - Part of ammonium-nitrogen is consumed for the biomass growth in line 2. - Paper industry effluents dilute the water in line 2 (sum of influent N-tot corresponds typically 20 22 mg/l)
NO3-N To preclarif Preclarified R3 out Plant effluent Date Day Median 24.1 -5.3. Analyses 24.1.2007 29.1.2007 1.2.2007 5.2.2007 8.2.2007 12.2.2007 15.2.2007 26.2.2007 1.3.2007 5.3.2007
16

NH4-N To preclarif Preclarified R3 out Plant effluent

COD NH4-N + NO3-N Plant effluent Preclarified R3 out Plant effluent

We Mo Th Mo Th Mo Th Mo Th Mo

1,4 10 1,8 3,0 1,3 1,4 1,0 1,6 2,0 1,4 1,2 1,1

0,7 10 1,3 0,7 0,7 0,5 2,6 0,7 0,5 0,2 0,6 0,9

33,1 10 22,8 35,0 33,3 35,4 39,4 28,0 32,8 41,2 19,0 29,7

4,1 41,0 36,5 5 10 9 4,1 33,1 36,5 42,8 4,7 42,0 43,6 40,0 32,2 5,8 19,9 21,4 36,1 32,1 3,3 42,2 43,9 36,1 34,8 1,3 48,3 49,4 47,4 45,8

14,5 9 26,9 18,9 9,0 9,1 8,6 14,5 12,0 30,3 16,9

1,5 79,0 5 5 2,2 85 1,5 0,7 0,3 3,6 73 79 56 100

37,8 9 38 44 33 24 33 44 35 50 47

48,5 9 50 52 44 49 37 47 53 49 47

6,2 5 6,3 6,2 6,5 3,6 4,9

Juurocon Oy, Nordic 2007

Eura nitrification and inhibition in line 1; summer 2007 (no paper industry effects)
NO3-N in R3 60 50 40 30 20
Su 15.7 07:00 Mo 16.7 16:00 Mo 16.7 07:00 Sa 28.7 23:00 Tu 31.7 09:00 Tu 24.7 08:00 Sa 28.7 10:00 We 18.7 13:00 Tu 18.7 07:00 Sa 21.7 04:00

10 0 15.7.07
17

Normal diurnal cycle when nitrification is incomplete 22.7.07 29.7.07

Weekends; load and flow lower; Nitrification should be complete

Juurocon Oy, Nordic 2007

Inhibition - desinfectants, solvents or heavy metals?

Eura current situation

Work to localize the inhibitory source in the municipal line is going on The full scale tests showed, that the pre-clarified (~100 mg/l TSS) paper industry effluent did not coat the carriers. Mechanical mixer is installed into R1. Basins are old concrete basins. No carrier damages, except a slight wear, are noticed. Simulation and full scale tests showed that the local food industry could shut down their biological pre-treatment if sludge circulation into line 1 can be used (paper industry effluents are pre-clarified) Sludge recycle may eliminate the need for additional alkalinity dosage in line 1 The process is reaching 70 % nitrogen removal and < 10 mg/l effluent nitrogen in case the inhibitory effects are in control (nitrification inhibition < 25%)

18

Juurocon Oy, Nordic 2007

Typical reasons for poor nitrification

Heavy metals Solvents Inhibitory sources

- Print houses, metal industry, service stations - Especially pickling and degreasing liquids - Special attention should be given for recovery and permanent monitoring and emptying of fat separators

Problems are often caused by small effluent streams Operational parameters at the wwtp
- pH, sludge age, sludge circulation due to reject waters, too low sludge removal from pre-clarifier

19

Juurocon Oy, Nordic 2007

Some inhibitory compounds

Nitrifying bacteria are sensitive for chemicals Worst sources (print houses, service stations etc) have typically low flow 1 mg/l is equal to one (1) litre in 1000 m3 Several easily biodegradable compounds are toxic for nitrifyers Spills once a month may have severe effects on nitrification

Biodegradability and toxity data EC50 mg/l Heterotrophs Nitrosomonas Compound Methanol 20000 880 Ethanol 24000 3900 Acetone 16000 1200 Toluene 110 84 Benzene 520 13 Chlorobenzene 310 0,71 Nitrobenzene 370 0,92 Phenol 1100 21 4-Chlorophenol 98 0,73 Nitrophenol 160 2,6 Aminophenol 0,27 0,04 1,1-Dichlorethane 620 0,91 Trichloroethylene 130 0,81 Methylchloride 320 1,2 Thiourea 2,8 Allylthiourea 0,1 Copper Crom (VI) Nickel Zink 1 1..10 12,5 0,0810 0,005 0,25 0,25 0,08..0,5

BOD / COD >50% >50% 25..50% >50% >50% <10% >50% >50%

>50% <10%

20

Juurocon Oy, Nordic 2007

10

Experiences - process selection

IFAS process doubles the nitrification rate compared to MBBR or activated sludge processes alone. IFAS stabilizes the biological process. Nitrifyers may stay in the biofilm also in case activated sludge does not nitrify. The carriers are more effective than fixed-in-place biofilm. However, the maintenance carrier process is more difficult and carrier retaining screens are needed Special attention needs to be given for - pre-treatment (no unscreened effluent to the biology) - Carrier selection small carriers need tighter screens - Carrier efficiency is related to the active biofilm area and to the turbulence on the biofilm - not to the nominal carrier surface area - Aeration and mixing arrangements the low load and high flow situations; carrier durability against of wear and selected mixers Learn from existing installations!

21

Juurocon Oy, Nordic 2007

Experiences carrier efficiency

All biofilms should have the same maximum groth rate (Umax) if there are no limiting factors. Carrier structure affects on the turbulence over the biofilmand further on the oxygen transfer efficiency and on the real nitrification capacity. Less surface are may be more efficient, if internal turbulence is high
5 Umax = 6 [g NO3-N/d/m2]; Kdo=4 [mg/l ] Nitrification rate [g NO3-N/d/m2] Umax = 6 [g NO3-N/d/m2]; Kdo=15 [mg/l ] 4

0 0
22 Juurocon Oy, Nordic 2007

O2 [mg/l]

10

11

Experiences - process selection

IFAS process doubles the nitrification rate compared to MBBR or activated sludge processes alone. IFAS stabilizes the biological process. Nitrifyers may stay in the biofilm also in case activated sludge does not nitrify. The carriers are more effective than fixed-in-place biofilm. However, the maintenance carrier process is more difficult and carrier retaining screens are needed Special attention needs to be given for - pre-treatment (no unscreened effluent to the biology) - Carrier selection small carriers need tighter screens - Carrier efficiency is related to the active biofilm area and to the turbulence on the biofilm - not to the nominal carrier surface area - Aeration and mixing arrangements the low load and high flow situations; carrier durability against of wear and selected mixers Learn from existing installations!

23

Juurocon Oy, Nordic 2007

Thank you; questions ?

Remember

Active biofilm area for nitrification is not the same as the specified surface area of clean carriers High biomass content in the carriers decreases the active biofilm area and efficiency The biomass population on the carriers and activated sludge are different
120 % 100 %

Biofilmin surface area / media surface area

Maintain this range with mixing

80 % 60 % 40 % 20 %

The correlation is carrier specific

0%

0,5

1,5

2,5

Biofilm thickness [mm]

24 Juurocon Oy, Nordic 2007

12