SustSan workshop: Single family treatment wetlands progress in Poland by Magdalena Gajewska
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

SustSan workshop: Single family treatment wetlands progress in Poland by Magdalena Gajewska

on

  • 97 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
97
Views on SlideShare
97
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

SustSan workshop: Single family treatment wetlands progress in Poland by Magdalena Gajewska SustSan workshop: Single family treatment wetlands progress in Poland by Magdalena Gajewska Presentation Transcript

  • Single family treatment wetlands progress in Poland Magdalena Gajewska Sustainable Sanitation Workshop, 4-5 April 2014, Ljubljana, Slovenia
  • 2006 2008 2010 2012 94.9 95.2 95.3 97.1 72.8 74.7 75.2 76.2 Central water system city village 2006 2008 2010 2012 84.8 85.8 86.1 86.5 20.2 23.5 24.8 29.4 Central sewer system city village PRESENT SITUATION Problem with wastewater treatment in rural areas with scattered buildings
  • According to the Polish Water Management Board, at present there are 1636 agglomerations, with 23 million of people connected to sewerage systems. It means that the other 15 million of people in Poland do not use sewerage systems. According to the new administration regulations, building of sewerage systems is not profitable if there are less than 120 inhabitants per 1 km of newly constructed system. PRESENT SITUATIONS Typical solution for scattered development = cesspools In many cases leaking cesspools!!!!!!!!!!
  • National Program for Municipal Wastewater Treatment does not apply to agglomerations with less than 2000 inhabitants. What means: • 5.0 million people in our country use the vacuum truck, • 3.85 million people have no access to any wastewater services, • 5.5 million inhabitants is located outside of any program
  • Threats • Pollution of surface and groundwater with disordered wastewater management. • Restrict access to clean water, which can cause epidemiological risks. • Aggravated aesthetic and landscape areas attractive in terms of recreational and tourism to be reliable.
  • There is an urgent need to build single family treatment plants existing single family STP needs for single family STP
  • Requirements • The amount of wastwater – 7.5 m3/day but 5.0 m3/day !!! • Four samples yearly • BOD 5 < 40 mg O2/ l ; COD < 150 mg O2/ l ; • TSS < 50 mg O2/ l ; • TN < 30 mg N/ l and TP < 5 mgP/l !!! • There is no minimum of reduction ! • BUT when discharge of wastewater into the ground on the property (settelment)- then BOD5 min. 20% reduction and TSS - 50 % of reduction
  • Possible solutions Single Family Tretment Plants (SF TPs) Natural methods Conventional methods Drain system Sand filter Treatment wetlands Bio-filters- thrikling filters Activated sludge All of them have pros and cons, the point is to select this one which will be BAT according to LCA
  • Hanna Obarska-Pempkowiak Magdalena Gajewska Ewa Wojciechowska Arkadiusz Ostojski As part of the project "Innovative solution for wastewater management in rural areas" NORWET (co-financed by the Ministry of Science and Higher Education No. E033/P01/2008/02 and the EEA Financial Mechanism and the Norwegian Financial Mechanism No. PL0271) team of Department of Water and Wastewater Technology and the Department of Sanitary Engineering Gdansk University of Technology has developed a concept and implemented a model of waste water and sludge for the individual household in the community Stężyca.
  • PL0271sponsoredbyagrantfrom IcelandLiechtensteinNorway throughtEEAFinancialMechanism andNorwegianFinancialMechanism NORWET FARM DOMESTIC SEWAGE SEPTIC TANK TREATMENT WETLANDVF or HF beds (3 CONFIGURATIONS) REED BEDS for sludge dewatering and mineralization SEWAGE SLUDGE REED COMPOST OUTFLOW SEEPAGE POND Conception of the complete sewage-sludge management system for a single family household
  • PL0271sponsoredbyagrantfrom IcelandLiechtensteinNorway throughtEEAFinancialMechanism andNorwegianFinancialMechanism NORWET Community Stężyca, Pommerania Region
  • PL0271sponsoredbyagrantfrom IcelandLiechtensteinNorway throughtEEAFinancialMechanism andNorwegianFinancialMechanism NORWET Community Stężyca, Pommerania Region 9326 inhabitants (A.D. 2009) surface area 16 032 ha two biggest villages: Stężyca 1806 inhabitants, Kamienica Szlachecka 813 inhabitants agriculture, forrestry, tourism, agrotourism Kaszubian Lake District difficult terrain conditions for building sewarage system (denivalation ca. 168 m)
  • Location of single-farm treatment wetlands in Stężyca Community PL0271sponsoredbyagrantfrom IcelandLiechtensteinNorway throughtEEAFinancialMechanism andNorwegianFinancialMechanism NORWET Ostrowo 69 inhabitants 4 TWs Bolwerk 59 inhabitants 1 TW Borucino 323 inhabitants 2 TWs Łączyno 301 inhabitants 2 TWs
  • PL0271sponsoredbyagrantfrom IcelandLiechtensteinNorway throughtEEAFinancialMechanism andNorwegianFinancialMechanism NORWET the impact of septic tank volume – retention time on treatment process and comparison with sequential VF beds (configuration II) and HF bed (configuration III) ? VF Pond pondpondSeptic tank Configuration I
  • PL0271sponsoredbyagrantfrom IcelandLiechtensteinNorway throughtEEAFinancialMechanism andNorwegianFinancialMechanism NORWET ? Is it better to have 1 or 2 VF beds Configuration II pond Septic tank
  • PL0271sponsoredbyagrantfrom IcelandLiechtensteinNorway throughtEEAFinancialMechanism andNorwegianFinancialMechanism NORWET ? -prefilter - comparison of VF and HF Configuration III pond Septic tank
  • 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 Configuration I Configuration II Configuration III COD in influent, mg/l 1 2 3 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Configuration I Configuration II Configuration III COD in effluent, mg/l 1 2 3 0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0 Configuration I Configuration II Configuration III COD efficency removal, % 1 2 3 mean Organic matter
  • 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Configuration I Configuration II Configuration III TN in influent, mg/l 1 2 3 0 10 20 30 40 50 Configuration I Configuration II Configuration III TN in effluent, mg/l 1 2 3 0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0 Configuration I Configuration II Configuration III TN efficency removal, % Serie1 Serie2 Serie3 Serie4 Total nitrogen
  • Single Family TWs
  • CONCLUSIONS •The application of treatment wetlands for single-family effluent is an effective and sustainable solution for wastewater treatment in the rural areas. •In first two years of operation good treatment effectiveness BOD 64.0-92.0%, TN 44.0-77.0%, TP 24.0-66.0% was observed. • After three year the efficiency removal of organic and TN increased 12-20 % except TP • In fourth year of explanation the amount of nitrate increased significantly in the effluent from SFTWs with SSVF beds •Comparing the achieved efficiency removal in three applied configuration shows: importance of TSS removal in pre-filter before application of TWs double contact time in sequentially working VSSF beds improve the efficiency removal up to 20% in comparison to the efficiency of single VSSF with bigger unit area.
  • Lesson Learn: The owners are : -willing to install and build the SF TWs – proud of them -not willing to use reed sludge daring beds for primary sludge -The authorities has no knowledge about what is TW (think like it is drainage ) BOOK -Wastewater consumption is less than 100 l/pe and thus the sewage are more dense so no rules like DWA 2006 or other could be apply during designing
  • Team distinction for development of an innovative technical solution entitled ’Implementation and Promotion of Ecological Engineering Basing on Sewage Treatment Plants’ In the competition for Master of Technology in academic year 2011/2012.