Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.
07/05/2016
1
CURRENTLY AVAILABLE WWT TECHNOLOGIES
ANAEROBIC TECHNOLOGIES
Energy use vs. treatment effectiveness
for variou...
07/05/2016
2
SUSTAINABLE WASTEWATER TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES
TO MINIMIZE ENERGY NEEDS
Aerobic Granular Sludge Technology
• A...
07/05/2016
3
SUSTAINABLE WASTEWATER TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES
TO MINIMIZE ENERGY NEEDS
Aerobic Granular Sludge Technology (3)...
07/05/2016
4
Anaerobic Systems versus Microbial Fuel Cells
Challenge: capture the energy potential of dissolved organics i...
07/05/2016
5
ENERGY RECOVERY EFFICIENCY FROM WWT ALTERNATIVE PROCESSES
In a conversion process, some energy is always lost...
07/05/2016
6
Energy losses result with MFCs as well, and can be substantial.
• Coulombic loss, portion of WW organics not ...
07/05/2016
7
ENERGY RECOVERY FROM WWT EMERGING PROCESSES
Anaerobic Electrochemical Membrane Bioreactor (AnEMBR)
• New anae...
07/05/2016
8
ENERGY RECOVERY FROM WWT EMERGING PROCESSES
Anaerobic Electrochemical Membrane Bioreactor (AnEMBR) (3)
Scanni...
07/05/2016
9
ENERGY RECOVERY FROM WWT EMERGING PROCESSES
Hydrogen Production from microbial fuel/electrolysis cells (MECs ...
07/05/2016
10
ENERGY RECOVERY FROM WWT EMERGING PROCESSES
Hydrogen Production from microbial fuel/electrolysis cells (MECs...
07/05/2016
11
ENERGY RECOVERY FROM WWT EMERGING PROCESSES
Hydrogen Production from bio-photolysis
• Direct biophotolysis r...
07/05/2016
12
ENERGY RECOVERY FROM WWT EMERGING PROCESSES
Hydrogen Production from photofermentation and dark fermentation...
07/05/2016
13
Sustainable sanitation concept (energy recovery and nutrient recycling) of the city of
Braunschweig, Germany...
07/05/2016
14
A FEW NUMBERS…
ENERGY BALANCE
EXAMPLE FOR A LARGE
WWTP WITH CURRENT
TECHNOLOGY UPGRADE
Pop. Served = 7.75 M ...
07/05/2016
15
Biosolids Energy
Biosolids produced = 0.224 ton/m3 (mean value)
Heating Value (HV) = 11,500 kJ/kg
Steam elec...
07/05/2016
16
BALANCE
Potential energy recovered from biogas =
0.435 GWh/d (electricity) (30% of energy input in
WWTP) and...
07/05/2016
17
A decentralized system is an onsite or cluster wastewater system
that is used to treat and dispose of relati...
07/05/2016
18
Decentralized wastewater treatment:
• variety of approaches for collection, treatment, and
dispersal/reuse o...
07/05/2016
19
DECENTRALIZED WASTEWATER TREATMENT
No predetermined limitations on applicable technologies.
Like any other s...
07/05/2016
20
DECENTRALIZED WASTEWATER TREATMENT
Advantages
Plants can remain unmanned for long periods, especially when
r...
07/05/2016
21
SUSTAINABILITY
THROUGH
TECHNOLOGY
INTEGRATION
&
OPTIMIZATION
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Lectures Capodaglio - Session 3

61 views

Published on

Sustainable Water - Energy - Centric Communities school
May 9 - 13, 2016 – Lake Como School of Advanced Studies

Published in: Science
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Lectures Capodaglio - Session 3

  1. 1. 07/05/2016 1 CURRENTLY AVAILABLE WWT TECHNOLOGIES ANAEROBIC TECHNOLOGIES Energy use vs. treatment effectiveness for various wastewater treatment technologies.
  2. 2. 07/05/2016 2 SUSTAINABLE WASTEWATER TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES TO MINIMIZE ENERGY NEEDS Aerobic Granular Sludge Technology • A new aerobic process, developed at TU Delft (NL) improves biological treatment of WW. Compared to current aerobic WW treatment processes, it shows similar efficiencies at lower costs, mostly due to energy savings (about 30% less than conventional AS). • Biomass is grown in a compact form, like aerobic granular sludge. This eliminates the use of the large settling tanks and allows much higher biomass concentrations in the reactors. Applying a proper feeding and selection regime to the biomass in a Granule Sequencing Batch Reactor (GSBR), organisms will grow in granular structure, without using carrier material. • The granular structure has many advantages: due to diffusion gradients the process conditions usually accommodated in various tanks are now accommodated inside the granular sludge, and thus only one tank is needed without large recycle flows. In AS systems, maximum biosolids concentrations are 3-5 g/l, while in aerobic granule reactors 15-20 g/l is feasible. This leads to decreased reaction time, and thus reactor volume. Due to compact granules morphology, these settle with velocity of 12-20 m/h (AS settles at ≈ 1 m/h). SUSTAINABLE WASTEWATER TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES TO MINIMIZE ENERGY NEEDS Aerobic Granular Sludge Technology (2) Aerobic process, achieves COD removal, nitrification and P removal with similar efficiencies to AS with considerable (about 30% less) energy savings than conventional AS
  3. 3. 07/05/2016 3 SUSTAINABLE WASTEWATER TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES TO MINIMIZE ENERGY NEEDS Aerobic Granular Sludge Technology (3) A GSBR consist of 2/3 simple bubble column reactors, in which all processes take place. This makes the system simple and compact. An installation based on aerobic granulation requires 20% of the surface area needed for a conventional activated sludge system. An economic analysis based on a full-scale design showed significant less investment costs and lower operational costs compared to conventional systems. Because of compact building, less construction material is needed. SOURCE: De Bruin, L.M.M., De Kreuk M.K., van der Roest H.F.R., Van Loosdrecht M.C.M. and Uijterlinde C. (2004). Aerobic Granular Sludge Technology, Alternative for Activated Sludge Technology? Wat. Sci. Technol. 49(11-12), 1-9. Anaerobic Systems versus Microbial Fuel Cells
  4. 4. 07/05/2016 4 Anaerobic Systems versus Microbial Fuel Cells Challenge: capture the energy potential of dissolved organics in domestic wastewater, with little energy expenditure and costs. One possibility is to replace secondary aerobic treatment with secondary anaerobic treatment. • Full-scale direct anaerobic treatment (UASB) of domestic WW has been applied in developing countries such as Brazil, Colombia, Mexico, Egypt, and India, where anaerobic treatment is considered to be a low-cost treatment alternative. • Low temperature and low organic concentrations are often cited as barriers to direct anaerobic treatment of domestic WWs. However, many studies have shown good performance at T as low as 5oC and with HRTs of only few hours. • BOD removal expected with present anaerobic reactors range from 70-80%, not sufficient to meet stringent regulatory standards. Because of this, it is commonly thought that effluent “polishing” (post-treatment) is necessary to meet them. • Recent studies with anaerobic membrane bioreactors indicate that polishing may be accomplished within an anaerobic reactor itself while providing a good quality effluent with low suspended solids and BOD concentrations. Anaerobic Systems versus Microbial Fuel Cells Another is a novel technology, still evolving, called Microbial Fuel Cells (MFCs), which can accomplish direct biological conversion of organic energy into electricity, that is hoped may achieve a more efficient conversion than the one currently possible with anaerobic treatment. With the anaerobic technology approach biogas/biomethane-driven engines are used to turn generators to produce electricity. This way, only about 30-40% of the gas energy is converted into electricity, while the remainder is given off as heat, which may or may not be useful in the specific circumstances. Chemical fuel cells are another approach to produce electricity from CH4 increasing conversion efficiency up to 50%. MFCs directly produce electric energy C12H22O11 + 13H2O ---> 12CO2 + 48H+ + 48e- In theory, an MFC is capable of energy efficiency far beyond 50% (SOURCE: Yue & Lowther, 1986)
  5. 5. 07/05/2016 5 ENERGY RECOVERY EFFICIENCY FROM WWT ALTERNATIVE PROCESSES In a conversion process, some energy is always lost. In anaerobic treatment of domestic WW about 8% of its potential energy is lost in the conversion of higher energy organics (carbohydrates) into CH4. Another 7% is lost in the conversion of some organics into microorganism cells necessary to carry out the reactions. WW treatment itself is not 100% efficient, and so additional losses result here, perhaps 5%. Thus, combined losses total about 19%, meaning that the CH4 produced would contain only about 81% of the original biodegradable organic energy potential. Through combustion, only about 35% of the biogas energy is converted into electricity, 65% is given off as heat. Overall, the electricity produced would contain only about 28% of the original energy potential in the biodegradable wastewater organics. (the heat might still be used, though) WW=100 process gas=81 combustion Electricity=28 Heat=53 ENERGY RECOVERY EFFICIENCY FROM WWT ALTERNATIVE PROCESSES This could be increased to more than 45% with the use of chemical fuel cells. Fuel cells efficiently convert hydrogen and oxygen into ultra-clean electricity and usable high quality heat suitable for making steam. Hydrogen is obtained from a fuel source such as clean natural gas or renewable biogas, and is reformed within the fuel cell itself (or can be obtained directly by anaerobic digestion).
  6. 6. 07/05/2016 6 Energy losses result with MFCs as well, and can be substantial. • Coulombic loss, portion of WW organics not converted into current. (similar to an anaerobic system with 7% loss to microbial growth and 5% loss due to treatment inefficiency, or about 12% combined). • Loss in electrochemical potential, which translates as a decrease below the theoretical value of about 1.1 V for WW organics. Voltage losses in MFCs currently tend to be much greater than 50%. Typical losses are 0.1 V at the anode and 0.5 V at the cathode for a combined loss of 0.6 V or over half the theoretical value. • Further substantial voltage loss results from the movement of electrons through electrical wires and especially from ion transport between electrodes, function of distance between electrodes, equaling about 1 V/cm of distance with typical wastewater. • The most optimistic projections for MFCs result from studies with high organic concentrations and simple substrates. At low reactor organic concentrations associated with efficient wastewater treatment more voltage loss is expected. • IN PRACTICE, achieving electrical generation efficiency that is already practical with anaerobic systems presents a great challenge for MFCs. • MFC systems have been estimated to cost 800 times anaerobic systems based upon available technologies. Several major breakthroughs are needed for MFCs to become competitive with electricity generation through anaerobic wastewater treatment. • SYSTEM ARCHITECTURE (and NOT microbiology) is limiting power recovery Differences in intermal resistence of a MFC system reflect proportionally on power generation
  7. 7. 07/05/2016 7 ENERGY RECOVERY FROM WWT EMERGING PROCESSES Anaerobic Electrochemical Membrane Bioreactor (AnEMBR) • New anaerobic treatment system that combines a microbial electrolysis cell (MEC) with membrane filtration using electrically conductive, porous, nickel- based hollow-fiber membranes (Ni-HFMs). Developed to treat low organic strength solution and recover energy in the form of biogas. Membranes serve the dual function of cathode for hydrogen evolution reaction (HER) and filtration of the effluent. • An AnEMBR system was operated (at laboratory scale) for 70 days with synthetic WW (COD = 320 mg/L). Removal of COD was >95% at all applied voltages tested. • Up to 71% of the substrate energy was recovered at an applied voltage of 0.7 V as biogas (83% CH4; < 1% H2) due to biological conversion of the hydrogen evolved at the cathode to methane. • Net energy required to operate the AnEMBR system at an applied voltage of 0.7 V was significantly less (0.27 kWh/m3) than that typically needed for wastewater treatment using aerobic membrane bioreactors (1−2 kWh/m3). SOURCE: Katuri KP et al., (2014) A novel anaerobic electrochemical membrane bioreactor (AnEMBR) with conductive hollow-fiber membrane for treatment of low-organic strength solutions. Environ Sci Technol. 48(21):12833-41 ENERGY RECOVERY FROM WWT EMERGING PROCESSES Anaerobic Electrochemical Membrane Bioreactor (AnEMBR) (2) Schematic representation of AnEMBR (1. feed, 2. power supply, 3. 10 Ω external resistor, 4. anode, 5. Ni-HFM cathode, 6. gas bag, 7. permeate). The dual purpose cathode fiber contain pores that enable water transport
  8. 8. 07/05/2016 8 ENERGY RECOVERY FROM WWT EMERGING PROCESSES Anaerobic Electrochemical Membrane Bioreactor (AnEMBR) (3) Scanning electron micrographs of virgin nickel hollow fiber membrane Showing: A) the outer surface of the membrane B) a close-up of the outer surface with pores visible C) cross section of the fiber D) Xray diffraction pattern of the Ni-HFM with peaks corresponding to Ni [111], [200], [220] planes a face-centered cubic (FCC) crystal structure ENERGY RECOVERY FROM WWT EMERGING PROCESSES Hydrogen Production from Wastewater Treatment • Biohydrogen, a high-energy and clean fuel, is perceived as an appealing clean energy carrier due to its conversion to energy yielding only pure water. • Several technologies for biohydrogen production have been proposed: microbial fuel/electrolysis cells (MECs and MFCs), bio-photolysis, photo fermentation, dark fermentation Currently adopted H2 production technologies are usually energy-intensive
  9. 9. 07/05/2016 9 ENERGY RECOVERY FROM WWT EMERGING PROCESSES Hydrogen Production from microbial fuel/electrolysis cells (MECs and MFCs) Producing hydrogen gas is possible at high yields by electrohydrogenesis, in "bioelectrochemically assisted microbial reactor" (BEAMR); biocatalyzed electrolysis cells (BECs); and microbial electrolysis cells (MECs). Fuel cells produce electricity, electrolysis cells produce hydrogen. An external power source supplies > 0.25V (less than that needed for water electrolysis = 1.8 V) for the reaction to occur. ENERGY RECOVERY FROM WWT EMERGING PROCESSES Hydrogen Production from microbial fuel/electrolysis cells (MECs and MFCs) (2) • MEC is basically a microbial fuel cell (MFC) modified in two ways: -adding a small amount of voltage (>0.2 V) to that produced by bacteria at the anode; and -not using oxygen at the cathode. • Addition of the voltage makes it possible to produce pure hydrogen gas at the cathode. The system is therefore operated as a completely anaerobic reactor. The voltage to be added can be produced using power from another MFC, or by using hydrogen gas produced by the MEC in a conventional hydrogen fuel cell. • The idea behind the system is that the protons and electrons produced by bacteria can be recombined at the cathode as hydrogen gas: this process is called hydrogen evolution reaction (HER). Theoretically 0.41 V is needed to make H2 from acetate, and bacteria produce 0.2-0.3 V. Thus, only about 0.2 V are needed to make hydrogen gas. This is much less than that needed for water electrolysis, which is about 1.8 V in practice. • It takes more energy to split water by electrolysis than is obtained from generated H2, but "splitting" up organic matter by bacteria is a thermodynamically favorable reaction when oxygen is used at the cathode. In this process, no oxygen is present and the reaction is not spontaneous unless a small voltage boost is added to that produced by bacteria. Thus, an H2 generating MEC process is actually an "organic matter electrolysis" procedure, rather than water electrolysis.
  10. 10. 07/05/2016 10 ENERGY RECOVERY FROM WWT EMERGING PROCESSES Hydrogen Production from microbial fuel/electrolysis cells (MECs and MFCs) (3) The same bacteria used in MFCs to make electricity are used in MECs to generate hydrogen. ENERGY RECOVERY FROM WWT EMERGING PROCESSES Hydrogen Production from microbial fuel/electrolysis cells (MECs and MFCs) (4) By improving materials and reactor architecture, hydrogen gas was produced at yields of 2.01-3.95 mol/mol (50-99% of the theoretical maximum, 4 mol/mol) at applied voltages of 0.2 to 0.8 V using acetic acid, a typical dead-end product of glucose or cellulose fermentation. At an applied voltage of 0.6 V, the overall energy efficiency of the process was 288% based solely on electricity applied, and 82% when the heat of combustion of acetic acid was included in the energy balance. Source: Cheng and Logan, 2007. Sustainable and efficient biohydrogen production via electrohydrogenesis Proceedings National Academy of Sciences of the U.S.A., 104(47)
  11. 11. 07/05/2016 11 ENERGY RECOVERY FROM WWT EMERGING PROCESSES Hydrogen Production from bio-photolysis • Direct biophotolysis refers to sustained hydrogen evolution under light irradiation. Due to high energy demand (4 ATP per hydrogen), energy conversion efficiency from light to H2 by nitrogenase is quite low (<1%). • A necessary technology breakthrough has not yet been attained for hydrogen productivity by nitrogen-fixing cyanobacteria. SOURCE: Yu and Takahashi (2007) Biophotolysis-based Hydrogen Production by Cyanobacteria and Green Microalgae. Communicating Current Research and Educational Topics and Trends in Applied Microbiology ENERGY RECOVERY FROM WWT EMERGING PROCESSES Hydrogen Production from photofermentation and dark fermentation processes • Photofermentation is carried out by nonoxygenic photosynthetic bacteria that use sunlight and biomass to produce hydrogen. Purple non-sulfur (PNS) and green sulfur (GS) bacteria such as Rhodobacter spheroids and Chlorobium vibrioforme, respectively, are capable of producing hydrogen gas by using solar energy and reduced compounds. Their photosynthetic systems differ from oxygenic photosynthesis due to their requirement for reduced substrates and their inability to oxidize water. • Conversion efficiency is very low, only around 1-5%. • Dark-fermentative hydrogen production occurs under anoxic/anaerobic conditions. The key pathway is the breakdown of carbohydrate rich substrates by bacteria to H2 and other intermediate products such as volatile fatty acids (VFA's) and alcohols. SOURCE: Akroum-Amrouche et al. (2013) Biohydrogen production by dark and photofermentation processes. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Conference (IRSEC)
  12. 12. 07/05/2016 12 ENERGY RECOVERY FROM WWT EMERGING PROCESSES Hydrogen Production from photofermentation and dark fermentation processes ENERGY RECOVERY FROM WWT EMERGING PROCESSES Hydrogen Production from anaerobic treatment of WW The fermentative hydrogen production (acidogenesis) process does not significantly reduce organic content of the feed. COD removal is below 20% during hydrogen production, which corresponds to an average of 2.5 mol H2/mol glucose. This can be removed in the subsequent (normal) anaerobic digestion step with conversion of organic content to methane. By appropriately sizing a two-stage process, subsequent hydrogen and methane production can be obtained. It has been proven that the effluent from hydrogenogenic reactor is an ideal substrate for methane production. SOURCE: Antonopoulou et al, (2008) Biofuels generation from sweet sorghum: Fermentative hydrogen production and anaerobic digestion of the remaining biomass. BIORES TECH Acetic acid production C6H12O6 + 2H2O → 2CH3COOH + 2CO2 + 4H2 Butyric acid production C6H12O6 → CH3CH2CH2COOH + 2CO2 + 2H2 Propionic acid production C6H12O6 + 2H2 → 2CH3CH2COOH + 2H2O
  13. 13. 07/05/2016 13 Sustainable sanitation concept (energy recovery and nutrient recycling) of the city of Braunschweig, Germany. The WWTP covers its energy needs with the production of biogas from excess sludge combined with biogas recovered from landfills and green waste digestion. Agricultural plants, digesting energy crops (corn) produce biogas, which is transformed to combined heat and power which is fed into the grid of Braunschweig. Source: VEOLIA WATER (2010)
  14. 14. 07/05/2016 14 A FEW NUMBERS… ENERGY BALANCE EXAMPLE FOR A LARGE WWTP WITH CURRENT TECHNOLOGY UPGRADE Pop. Served = 7.75 M PE Flow, average = 4 M m3/d Energy required = 1300 MWh/d (from historical records) energy recovery will be calculated assuming on two reliable energy recoveries which are biogas and biosolids incineration (20% of total). Calculation also will be conducted for MFCs which will be installed after the Anaerobic Digester Biogas Energy is calculated based on generation from CHP (Combined Heat & Power) system using a typical engine with thermal output 5,520 Btu/kWh and Electric Efficiency (%) HHV = 29%. Biogas generation per capita = 0.029 m3/person-d Total Gas Generation = 225000 m3/day Gas Heat Content (HHV) = 6700 W/m3 Heat Potential of Gas = 1.5 GWh/d Electric Production = 0.435 GWh/d Heat Recovery = 2.4 GBtu/d (0.69 GWh/d)
  15. 15. 07/05/2016 15 Biosolids Energy Biosolids produced = 0.224 ton/m3 (mean value) Heating Value (HV) = 11,500 kJ/kg Steam electric heat rate (HR) = 10,550 kJ/kWh Thus the energy recovery from biosolids is about ER= 0.224 x 4x106 x 11500x103 x 0.2/ 10550 = 196000000 kWh/d (0.2 GWh/d) NOTE: could vary if the fraction of biosolids to incineration were increased MFC Energy MFC installed after the Anaerobic Digestion tank, fed with effluent from anaerobic digester. Its volume is calculated based on AD volume. Dry volatile solids and biodegradable COD removed are 0.15 kg/m3 and 0.14 kg/m3 respectively, sludge contains 95% moisture, density 1.02, thus sludge volume is calculated as: V = 0.15 x 4x106 / 1.02 x 0.05 = 11750 m3/d HRT of MFC = 12 hrs (from pilot tests) Volume of MFC = 5875 m3 Power density of MFC fed by digester effluent = 40 W/m3.* Electricity generated from MFC = 5875 x 40 = 235 kW. Electricity generation = 235 x 24 = 5640 kWh/d (5.64 MWh/d) * From pilot tests
  16. 16. 07/05/2016 16 BALANCE Potential energy recovered from biogas = 0.435 GWh/d (electricity) (30% of energy input in WWTP) and 0.69 GWh/d (heat) Potential energy recovered from biosolids 0.2 GWh/d Potential energy recovered from MFC 5.64 MWh/d (very small amount compared with total energy consumption in WWTP) Residual required energy to run WWTP 1.3-0.435-0.2-0.005= 0.660 GWh/d In addition, 0.69 GWh/d as thermal energy can be used to heat nearby buildings or for industrial uses. SUMMARY About 50% electrical energy recovery can be achieved with currently available, standard technology application In addition, 0.69 GWh/d are available as thermal energy On a per capita basis, the WWTP can produce 8.5 W/person, with an average global energy use of 2 kW/person HOWEVER, the use of new technologies could largely improve these figures.
  17. 17. 07/05/2016 17 A decentralized system is an onsite or cluster wastewater system that is used to treat and dispose of relatively small volumes of wastewater, generally originating from individual or groups of dwellings and businesses located relatively close together.
  18. 18. 07/05/2016 18 Decentralized wastewater treatment: • variety of approaches for collection, treatment, and dispersal/reuse of wastewater for individual dwellings, industrial or institutional facilities, clusters of homes or businesses, and entire communities. • evaluation of site-specific conditions is performed to determine the appropriate type of treatment system for each location. • systems are a part of permanent infrastructure and can be managed as stand-alone facilities or be integrated with centralized sewage treatment systems. • provide a range of treatment options from simple, passive treatment with soil dispersal (i.e. septic systems), to complex and mechanized approaches such as advanced treatment units that collect and treat waste from multiple buildings and discharge to either surface waters or the soil. • typically installed at or near the point where the wastewater is generated. Decentralized wastewater treatment Smart alternative for communities needing new systems or modifying, replacing, expanding existing ones. They can be: • Cost-effective (avoid large capital costs, incl. long sewer lines) and economical (reduce O&M costs, incl. energy for pumping) • Promoting business and job opportunities, respond to growth while preserving land space • Green, sustainable and resilient (small scale units are more resilient than big ones to natural and man-made catastrophes) • Benefiting local water quality and availability (reuse, recycle) • Safe for protection of environment, public health, water quality (treat pollution at source) • Reduce conventional pollutants, nutrients, and emerging contaminants, depending on technology • Suitable for applications ranging from a few to thousands of people
  19. 19. 07/05/2016 19 DECENTRALIZED WASTEWATER TREATMENT No predetermined limitations on applicable technologies. Like any other system, must be properly designed, maintained, and operated to provide optimum benefits. Where they are determined to be a good solution, decentralized systems help communities reach the triple bottom line of sustainability: • good for the environment, • good for the economy, and • good for the people. (SOURCE: Massoud et al. 2009, Jou. Env. Management)
  20. 20. 07/05/2016 20 DECENTRALIZED WASTEWATER TREATMENT Advantages Plants can remain unmanned for long periods, especially when remote monitoring is adopted. Remote inspection of the WWTP can be performed, with (optional) a. Computer unit onsite for WWTP control b. Online monitoring of few (depending on size) parameters possible c. Remote connection with control centre (usually 1/day - for data transfer, immediate reporting in case of failure, by fixed line, GSM) d. Central control and onsite remote inspection on demand an experienced operator evaluates data remotely 24/7, if necessary sends service technicians e. Routine visits (depending on size) for visual checkup and supply of reagents (if necessary) COMBINATION OF ANAEROBIC AND WETLAND TECHNOLOGIES IN A 400 P.E. DECENTRALIZED TREATMENT PLANT WITH SOURCE SEPARATION
  21. 21. 07/05/2016 21 SUSTAINABILITY THROUGH TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION & OPTIMIZATION

×