H 83 BRE 12/13

DESIGN OF SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT

PREPARED BY, KUKNESVARY PUNIAMURTHY (007973) SUBMITTED TO, DR. LAU PHEI LI

DATE OF SUBMISSION, 4th MAY 2013

1. INTRODUCTION
Addressing the challenge of reducing biological oxygen demand (BOD), suspended solids (SS) and ammonia concentration from a sewage treatment plant. Biological nitrification is the process of converting ammonia in wastewater to nitrate using aerobic autotrophic bacteria in the treatment process. Nitrification is actually a two-step process for removing ammonia from wastewater using two different types of autotrophic bacteria that oxidize ammonia to nitrite (nitrosomonas) and then oxidize nitrite to nitrate (nitrobacter). Biological nitrification systems are designed to completely convert all ammonia to nitrate. Both types of autotrophic bacteria require proper biomass concentrations (mixed liquor suspended solids [MLSS]), specific environmental conditions (temperature, pH, alkalinity, etc.), enough residence time in the treatment process, and significantly more air than is required to treat for biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) only. Nitrification requires over four times the amount of oxygen that is required for BOD removal. Another factor that should be considered in the design of all WWTPs that provide biological nitrification is the loss of alkalinity. Adding alkalinity in the form of sodium hydroxide or other chemicals may be necessary. (Water World, 2013) The most common treatment process that are used for biological nitrification at wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) are conventional activated sludge, extended aeration, sequencing batch reactor (SBR), membrane bioreactor (MBR) and lagoon system. Based on careful studying on the advantages and disadvantages, also to keep into consideration of the design of the sewage treatment plant which complies with the Environmental Quality (Sewage and Industrial effluents) Regulations 1979, MBR is chosen as the bioreactor involved in the sewage treatment plant.

2. THE CHOICE OF MICROORGANISM CHOSEN WITH APPROPIATE JUSTIFICATION

ANAMMOX BACTERIA

For the nitrification process in the membrane bioreactor, the bacterium chosen is Anammox Bacteria. In this study Anammox process removes ammonium without the supply of oxygen and the electron acceptor is nitrite. Usually, the cost of conventional ammonium removal via nitrification process is contributed by the aeration cost and the requirement of expensive electron donor such as methanol. However, there is no need of an extra electron donor under the Anammox process. This is considered one of the best discoveries to replace the general nitrification process involving nitrifying bacteria such as Nitrosomonas and Nitrobacter. The (generalized) overall reaction of the One Step Anammox process is: 2NH4+ + 1.5O2 N2 + 2H+ + 3H2O The emission of greenhouse gases are greatly reduced using the Anammox process. This is supported by the fact that the overall CO2 emission of a wastewater treatment plant can be reduced by approximately 88% because the Anammox process itself consumes CO2. Other than that, the by- product of conventional denitrification process which is nitrous oxide (N2O) is not emitted using that Anammox Process.

Figure 2.1: The Anammox Process (left) and Anammox bacterium (right)

3. BIOREACTOR DESIGN AND CONFIGURATIONS

Membrane Bioreactor (MBR) 1. Introduction

Membrane bioreactor comprises of membrane separation and biological treatment which aims to remove nutrients, pathogens, organic matters, and also micro pollutants in water. Membrane bioreactor usually operates under aerobic an anaerobic conditions. It can also be operated in low and high organic loading. Thus, membrane bioreactor is considered one of the best equipment used in water and wastewater treatments. (Nguyen, 2006) High strength waste water can be treated using MBR since the reactor can be operated at high sludge ages and high biomass concentration. An added advantage to this would be lower biomass yields. A high degree of organic oxidation and a free solid effluent can be achieved by using MBR. Besides that, a higher content of slow growing nitrifying bacteria can be maintained when the MBR is operated under a long solid retention time (SRT). Using MBR process, nitrification process is much more effective compared to conventional activated sludge. Among the reasons are longer SRT, lower food/microorganisms ratio and mixed liquor contains large fraction of small particles. Nitrogen present in the form of ammonia will be transformed to nitrite and nitrate during the aeration step in the wastewater treatment plant. Total nitrification with effluent ammonia concentration which is below than 1mg NH4-N/L can be obtained by using MBR. Furthermore, the nitrogen removal efficiency can be improved by ensuring the SRT is kept higher than 5 days under the operation of MBR. (Nguyen, 2006) Submerged membrane bioreactor (sMBR) is one of the most common types of MBR along with external membrane bioreactor. In external membrane MBR, the membrane modules are located outside the reactor basin. The external membrane module is generally favoured in the industries. Comparative between internal MBR and external MBR are done to give a better understanding and coming up with the best choice overall further in Table 3.1 below. (Chettiyapan)

Table 3.1: Comparison between external and submerged MBRs (Chettiyapan) Submerged MBR Suitability Sensitivity Good filterability with strength wastewater External MBR low Poor filterability with high strength wastewater. to variations wastewater and flow

Less sensitive to variations More sensitive involving wastewater involving characteristics and flow characteristics fluctuations. fluctuations.

Membrane flux

Low permeate per unit area of High permeate per unit area of membrane membrane

Membrane Requires frequent backwashing Requires less frequent backwashing backwashing & and cleaning and cleaning cleaning Trans membrane pressure Power requirement Operation Requires low trans membrane Requires pressure pressure high trans membrane

Less power is required per m More power is required per m of of wastewater treated wastewater treated Less operational flexibility More operational flexibility using control parameters; SRT, HRT and MLVSS Easier to extend

Extension of WWTP Capacity Economics

Difficult to extend

At low wastewater influent rate- At low wastewater influent rateLess expensive More expensive

Based on literature review, submersible bioreactors are found to be economical compared to other options available. This is supported by the fact that it requires a low energy and compact size. Other advantages include, low F/M ratio, and also higher percentage involving removal of COD, BOD, nitrogen and pathogen. In this project, the main aim is to remove nitrogen, BOD and suspended solids. Therefore, anoxic zones before or after aerobic treatment can be used for denitrification. This depends solely on the effluent nitrate and total nitrogen requirements. (C.Visvanathan)

Submerged membrane bioreactor (sMBR) is one of the most common types of MBR along with external membrane bioreactor. Comparative between internal MBR and external MBR are done to give a better understanding and coming up with the best choice overall further in Table 3.1. In this sMBR, the membrane modules are directly installed in the activated sludge reactor vessel. Permeate pump is used to suck out the effluent from the membrane module while the suspended solids fall back into the basin.(Chettiyapan)

Figure 3.1: Typical Submerged membrane bioreactor Table 3.2: Mechanical Design of Submerged Membrane Bioreactor (MBR) (Sung Soo Han, 2004) Volume of bioreactor (m) Membrane used Pore size (m) Filtration area (m) Number of bioreactor used Length of fibre (m) Filtration rate (L/m.h) 5.0 Polyethylene hollow fibre membrane module 0.4 0.3 3.0 1.4 17.5

The four bioreactors were operated at the same hydraulic residence time (HRT) and air flow rate. Temperature and pH are adjusted in order to eliminate their influences. Food to microorganism ratios (F/M) of all reactors was about 33 kg COD/kg MLSS-day. The membrane bioreactor is made of concrete steel with inner lining transparent acrylic sheet for easier cleaning purpose. This membrane was submerged in to the reactors and it connected to a pump which used to send the effluent out. (Chettiyapan)

4. OPERATING CONDITIONS INCLUDING OPERATING TEMPERATURE AND pH

Table 4.1: Operating conditions of the submerged Membrane coupled SBR system Working volume (L) Feeding volume(L) Hydraulic retention time(h) Three sludge retention time (days) F/M (kg COD/kg MLSS day) Temperature (C) pH 5000 1667 12 555 33 33 33 25 2 7.0-8.0

The best condition of pH for the removal of ammonia took place at pH 7.5-8. It has also been reported that the higher ammonia removal efficiency was obtained within the range of 7.3-8.3 at a stationary phase. (R. Nabizadeh 2012)

5. DOWNSTREAM PROCESSING UNIT OPERATIONS A series of polyethylene hollow fibre membrane are submerged directly within the membrane bioreactor which consists of Anammox bacteria. This greatly simplifies the overall plant layout for the sewage treatment plant and thus provides an effluent which is very clean. By this configuration, the energy required for aeration of the treatment liquor also generates an upward cross flow over the membranes, keeping fouling of the filtration surface to a minimum. The membrane bioreactor treatment produces a high quality disinfected effluent. The process requires no primary or secondary settlement stages and no additional tertiary treatment or UV stages to achieve disinfection suitable for many applications. Raw sewage only requires screening and degritting prior to entering the membrane bioreactor tank and subsequent discharge. (Aquatec Maxcon)

6. ASSESSMENT ON THE SUSTAINABILITY OF BIOPROCESS

MBR is increasingly popular choice among the wastewater treatment plant. Thus continuous improvement and evolvement in this technology consistently take place to cater for the sustainability of the process. The table below shows the criteria of sustainability involved in MBR:

Table 6.1: Sustainability criteria of MBR (Anthony 2007)

7. REFERENCE
1. Nguyen Hoai Nam. (2006). DECENTRALIZED WASTEWATER TREATMENT AND RECLAMATION USING MEMBRANE BIOREACTOR. Available: http://www.faculty.ait.ac.th/visu/Data/AITThesis/Master%20Thesis%20final/nam_final%2006.pdf. Last accessed 4/5/2013.

2. Joe Nye. (Unknown). Addressing the Challenge of Removing Ammonia from Wastewater.
Available: http://www.waterworld.com/articles/print/volume-26/issue-3/editorialfeatures/addressing-the-challenge.html. Last accessed 4/5/2013. 3. Chettiyapan Visvanathan. (Unknown). Treatment of Industrial Wastewater by Membrane Bioreactor. Available: http://www.eolss.net/Sample-Chapters/C07/E6-144-13.pdf. Last accessed 4/5/2013.

4. C. Visvanathan. (Unknown). ROLE OF MEMBRANE BIOREACTORS IN ENVIRONMENTAL

ENGINEERING APPLICATIONS. Available: http://www.faculty.ait.ac.th/visu/pdfs/Activities/Participation/RMBEE.pdf. Last accessed 4/5/2013. 5. Sung Soo Han. (2005). Influence of sludge retention time on membrane fouling and bioactivities in membrane bioreactor system. Available: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0032959204004042. Last accessed 4/5/2013. 6.Unknown. (Unknown). Membrane Bioreactor. Available: http://www.aquatecmaxcon.com.au/technologies/sewage-treatment/membrane-bio-reactor. Last accessed 4/5/2013. 7.Anthony G.Fane. (2007). Sustainability and membrane processing of wastewater for reuse. Available: http://projects.itn.pt/Luisa%20Alves/Bibliografia%20citada%20na%20proposta/sustainability%20ma mbrane%20processing%20WW%20for%20reuse.pdf. Last accessed 4/5/2013.

Membrane bioreactor

Hollow fibre membrane Grit chamber Retention time: 5mins Capacity: 0.25m Air

Influent

Screen

Aeration tank

Anammox bacteria

Membrane bioreactor Retention time: 3 days (for each) Effluent

Process Flow Diagram Sewage Treatment Plant Drawn by, Kuknesvary Puniamurthy

F/M ratio: 33 kg COD/kg MLSS day (for each)

Waste sludge