The CAWT's Dr. Barbara Siembida-Losch's presentation to the Annual Ontario Onsite Wastewater Association Conference (March 2015). Insight into Innovative Decentralized Wastewater Technologies.

1. Insight into Innovative Decentralized
Wastewater Technologies
Barbara Siembida-Lösch
Gordon Balch, Heather Broadbent
Centre for Alternative Wastewater Treatment, Fleming College,
Lindsay,
2015 Annual OOWA Conference & Trade Show, Tuesday, March 24th, 2015, Niagara
Falls, Ontario

2. Outline
• Advanced Treatment Technologies
– residential, communal, and commercial systems
• Legal Framework and Performance Validation
Standards
• CAWT - Applied Research
 case study on phosphorus removal
• Future of Decentralized Treatment
2

3. Advanced Treatment Systems
3
SepticSmart 2010
or suspended

4. Advanced Treatment Systems
4
Conventional
Systems
Advanced
Systems
Septic tank or
advanced
treatment unit
30-50% 50-70%
Soil ca. 90% ca. 10%

5. Legal Framework for Advanced
Treatment Systems
• The Ontario Building Code, Part 8: Sewage
Systems, regulates a number of different classes of
onsite sewage systems up to 10,000 l/d (larger
systems are regulated by the Ministry of the
Environment)
• Class 4, typically applied to conventional onsite
systems, is intended to minimize pathogens
released into the environment
– may also include secondary and tertiary (advanced)
treatment systems located between septic tank and
leaching bed
5

6. Approval of Advanced Treatment
Systems
• Several advanced systems, listed under the
Supplementary Standards SB-5 to the
Building Code were evaluated by the Ministry
of the Municipal Affairs and Housing (MMAH)
• The following performance criteria must be
met:
– testing and certification by the NSF
International (U.S.-based) standard
– consideration of Ontario’s
environmental/climatic conditions
– evidence of in-field performance
6

7. Approval Performance Criteria
• As of January1, 2014, the treatment unit effluent
criteria have changed
• These performance criteria now match up with
the national CAN/BNQ 3680-600, “Onsite
Residential Wastewater Treatment technologies”
• The SB-5 units must meet the CAN/BNQ 3680-
600 before January 1, 2017!
7
Secondary quality
effl.
Tertiary quality effluent

8. SB-5 Advanced Treatment Systems
8

9. 9
Advanced Treatment Systems
• Homeowners may want to consider the advanced
systems when:
- properties have inadequate conditions for conventional
systems (e.g., heavy clays, shallow soils, high water
table, etc.)
- limited space to accommodate the size of a
conventional leaching bed
- wanting to provide additional protection to groundwater
by additional nitrate reduction (only some of the
treatment units can reduce nitrate)

10. Enhanced Nitrogen Removal
(stationary fixed film)
10
Anoxic Aerobic Clarifier
Denitrification Nitrification
+
BOD removal
Denitrification
• 2.3 g BOD per g NO3-N
• 3.02 g organic matter per g NO3-N
• Heterotrophic bacteria for generation of carbon source
• Significant portion of BOD generally consumed during nitrification, leaving little
for denitrification
High in
BOD &
NH4
Return unconsumed
Carbon

11. Moving Bed BioReactor
(MBBR)
11
• Small foot
print
• Very efficient
• Up to 5Xs
biofilm
• Does require
pumps and
aeration

12. Treatment Options
Domestic
 Conventional Septic Systems
 Advanced Wastewater Treatment
• Microbial (suspended or fixed) ± aeration
• Physical filtration ± aeration
Alternative
 Constructed Wetlands
 Engineered Bio Reactors (e.g., S-reducing Bacteria for
Arsenic)
 Sorptive media for Phosphorus removal
 Moving Bed Bio Reactors for Oxidized N
 Ozone
 UV
 Membrane Bioreactors
 others
12

13. CAWT is active in the
following sectors:
• Mining
• Agriculture
• Aquaculture
• Oil & gas
• Pulp & paper
• Food, etc.

15. Phosphorous adsorptive media
for Stormwater runoff
15
• Monitoring studies have identified issues pertaining to leaching of
phosphorus from compost-containing bioretention installations
• A pilot study was conducted to assess the phosphorus removal
performance of bioretention soil mix amended with Imbrium Systems
Sorbtive®Media AI 28x48
• Sorbtive®Media is an engineered granular media containing aluminum
oxide and iron oxide

16. Material and Methods
16
Header Tank 3
Header Tank 2
Header Tank 1
Bioretention Cell 3
Bioretention Cell 2
Bioretention Cell 1
Ball valve
Sump pump with series of ball
valves to control flow rate
Well water inflow
Outflow to Retention
Pond
Side view
Bioretention Cell 4Header Tank 4
Header Tank 5 Bioretention Cell 5
Collection
Tank

17. Artificial Stormwater Composition
17
• 1000 L stormwater was spiked with KH2PO4
• Four target concentrations applied in order the lowest to the highest
(0.2; 0.4; 0.6; 0.8 mg/L)
• Ionic compounds were added to simulate the typical matrix of
stormwater
Target P-basis
concentration
Average TDP
measured value
% of
target
Average TP
measured value
% of
target
(mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L)
0.2 0.11 56 0.16 78
0.4 0.28 70 0.36 89
0.6 0.46 76 0.54 90
0.8 0.65 82 0.72 90
• Measured phosphorus concentrations were consistently lower than
the target
• The deviations decreased as the target concentration increased
• Dissolved phosphorus concentrations were consistently lower than
total

18. Bioretention Soil Mix Composition
18
Cell Number
Soil Mix Composition (% by volume)
Sand Peat Moss Sorbtive®Media
Bioretention Cell 1
(control)
85% 15% 0%
Bioretention Cell 2 82% 15% 3%
Bioretention Cell 3 80% 15% 5%
Bioretention Cell 4 75% 15% 10%
Bioretention Cell 5 68% 15% 17%
Layers
• Bottom layer: 15 cm of ½-inch stone
• Middle layer: 3 cm of sand
• Top layer: 50 cm of soil mix

19. Phosphorus Removal Performance
19
• The measured concentration difference between
the effluent and header tank was multiplied by five
to estimate phosphorus retained for a given week
• Calculated values were summed for all twenty
weeks
Cumulative Retained Phosphorus Mass

20. 20
Cumulative mass of total dissolved phosphorus (TDP) retained in
each bioretention cell

21. 21
Cumulative mass of total phosphorus (TP) retained in each
bioretention cell

22. Phosphorus Removal Performance
22
• The percent removal efficiency = (header tank
concentration – effluent concentration)/(header
tank concentration)
• Calculated percent values were averaged for five
weeks
Percent Removal of Phosphorus

23. 23
Percent removal of total dissolved phosphorus (TDP) for each
bioretention cell at each of four different target phosphorus
concentrations

24. 24
Percent removal of total phosphorus (TP) for each bioretention
cell at each of four different target phosphorus concentrations

25. Conclusions
25
• Phosphorus removal using a sand/peat
soil mix can be greatly enhanced
through amendment with Sorbtive®
Media.
• Sorbtive® Media amended bioretention
cells demonstrated much greater
removal of dissolved and total
phosphorus.
• Removal efficiency of the amended
cells reached upwards to 99% and at
least 84% for the duration of the study.
• Effluent pH is relatively unaffected.

26. Thank you!

27. Future of Decentralized Treatment
27
• Growth of cluster and other decentralized
systems
• Recycling treated effluents
• Management program for onsite systems
• May see greater need for advanced treatment
systems for Nitrate and Phosphorous in
relationship to source water protection
• The global warming potential of septic tanks and
other advanced technologies

28. Questions?
Contact information:
Barbara Siembida-Lösch
barbara.siembida-losch@flemingcollege.caollege.cac

29. Ionic Compound
Quantity of salt
added per 990 L
(g)
Sodium Chloride (NaCl) 123.81
Calcium Chloride (CaCl2 ) 24.50
Sodium Sulfate (Na2SO4) 23.35
Sodium Nitrate (NaNO3) 2.81
Potassium Chloride (KCl) 2.59
Magnesium Chloride Hexahydrate ( MgCl2.6H2O) 5.66
Quantity of salts added to 990 L of well water to create artificial
stormwater
• Ionic compounds were added to simulate the typical matrix of
stormwater
• The matrix remained standardized