Waste Stabilisation Ponds

http://www.sswm.info/print/665?tid=755

Waste Stabilisation Ponds Published on SSWM (http://www.sswm.info)

Compiled by:

Dorothee Spuhler (seecon international gmbh)

Waste or Wastewater Stabilisation Ponds (WSPs) are artificial man-made lagoons in which blackwater, greywater or faecal sludge are treated by natural occurring processes and the influence of solar light, wind, microorganisms and algae. The ponds can be used individually or in series of an anaerobic, facultative and aerobic (maturation) pond. WSPs are low-cost for O & M and BOD and pathogen removal is high. However, large surface areas and expert design are required. The effluent still contains nutrients (e.g. N and P) and is therefore appropriate for the reuse in agriculture (irrigation) or aquaculture (e.g. fish- or macrophyte ponds) but not for direct recharge in surface waters.
In Out

Blackwater, Faecal Sludge, Greywater, Brownwater, Sludge, Fertigation Water, Biogas (if anaerobic pond Faeces, Excreta is covered)

Introduction
Wastewater stabilisation ponds are large man-made basins in which greywater, blackwater or faecal sludge can be treated to an effluent of relatively high quality and apt for the reuse in agriculture. The treatment, in opposition to conventional treatment processes such as activated sludge system takes days to week (MARA & PEARSON 1998 in ROSE 1999), but WSPs provide a good option for a (semi-) centralised treatment in developing countries because of the low capital and particularly low O & M (Operation and Maintenance) costs. In addition, it is one of the few low-cost natural processes which provides good treatment of pathogens (DFID 1998). The effluent of WSP is relatively rich in nutrients (nitrogen and phosphorus) and represents an immediate resource for reuse in agriculture or aquaculture (ROSE 1999). Experience from around the world has shown that WSPs are very often the most cost-effective wastewater treatment method, but their major disadvantage is that availability of large areas of land far away from homes and public spaces is required (DFID 1998). Anaerobic ponds require approximately 4 m2/m3 daily flow and facultative aerobic ponds require 25 m2/m3 daily flow (SASSE 1998). WSPs make use of the sun, wind, gravity, and biological activity to achieve treatment. The principles behind WSP operation are simple and they place no strain on technical resources or labour (WHO, 1987). However, both the process design and the physical design of WSPs have to be carried out very carefully by competent design engineers since WSPs are more than just holes in the ground (PENA VARON 2004).

1 of 8

15/09/2012 19:23

Waste Stabilisation Ponds

http://www.sswm.info/print/665?tid=755

Figure 1: Typical scheme of a waste stabilisation system: An anaerobic, facultative and maturation pond in series. Source: adapted from TILLEY et al. (2008)

Treatment Mechanism and Basic Design Principles

The different types of WSP can be used individually, but the most efficient and common system generally consists of three ponds in series: first an anaerobic; then a facultative pond and finally an aerobic or maturation pond. Only slightly polluted wastewater may be discharged directly into primary facultative ponds. This can be done also with more heavily polluted wastewater in situations when anaerobic ponds are unacceptable because of odour nuisance. In essence, anaerobic and facultative ponds are designed for BOD (Biological Oxygen Demand) removal and maturation ponds for pathogen removal, although some BOD removal occurs in maturation ponds and some pathogen removal in anaerobic and facultative ponds. Depending on the requirement for the final effluent, only anaerobic and facultative ponds are necessary in some instances. Anaerobic Treatment Ponds (APs)

Mini waste stabilisation ponds consisting of a anaerobic (right), facultative (middle) and aerobic pond (left) at the CREPA headquarter, in Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso and a large-scale waste stabilisation pond system in Maine (USA). Source: SPUHLER (2006) (left) and http://www.lagoonsonline.com/corinna-maine.htm [Accessed: 07.02.2010]

Anaerobic Treatment Ponds are deep ponds (2 to 5 m) devoid of dissolved oxygen, where sludge is deposited on the bottom and anaerobic bacteria break down the organic matter by anaerobic digestion, releasing methane and carbon dioxide. Viruses, bacteria, helminth, Ascaris eggs and other pathogens can also be inactivated by sedimentation when associated with solids. N, P and K can also be reduced by sludge formation and the release of ammonia into the air. However, the main function of anaerobic ponds is BOD removal, which can be reduced 40 to 85 % (WSP 2007). As a complete process, the anaerobic pond serves to: Settle undigested material and non-degradable solids as bottom sludge Dissolve organic material Break down biodegradable organic material

2 of 8

15/09/2012 19:23

Waste Stabilisation Ponds

http://www.sswm.info/print/665?tid=755

BOD removal in anaerobic ponds is governed by the same mechanisms that occur in all other anaerobic reactors (MARA et al. 1992) and anaerobic ponds do not or only rarely contain algae. The process (as in septic tanks) relies on the sedimentation of settable solids and subsequent anaerobic digestion in the resulting sludge layer. During anaerobic digestion, biogas is produced which could be collected by covering the anaerobic pond with a floating plastic membrane (PENA VARON 2004, WAFLER 2008). The recovered biogas can be used for heating, cooking or, if sufficient amounts can be collected for energy production. APs can receive organic loads usually in the range of 100 to 350 g BOD/m3/day (PENA VARON 2004). They should not be operated below 10C, and the load, which can be treated increases linearly with temperature rise (e.g. 100 g/m3/day at 10C and 300g/m3/day at 20C). The design temperature should be the mean of the coldest month of the year (PENA VARON 2004). A HRT of one day should be sufficient for a BOD5 lower than 300 mg/m3/day at 20C, but the recommended HRT range varies from 2 to 5 days (WSP 2007). For high-strength industrial wastes, up to three anaerobic ponds in series might be necessary. The optimum pH for digestion lies at 6 to 8 and acidic wastewaters thus require neutralising prior to treatment. Due to its toxicity to anaerobic bacteria, ammonia concentrations should not exceed >80 mg NH3-N/L.

Pond Anaerobic Pond Facultative Pond Maturation Pond

BOD Removal 50 to 85% 80 to 95% 60 to 80%

Pathogen Removal

90%

HRT 1 to 5 days 5 to 30 days 15 to 20 days

Comparison of the treatment performance of different waste stabilisation ponds. Source: WSP (2007)

Facultative Treatment Ponds (FPs) Facultative Treatment Ponds are the simplest of all WSPs and consist of large shallow ponds (depth of 1 to 2m) with an aerobic zone close to the surface and a deeper, anaerobic zone. There are two types of facultative ponds: primary facultative ponds that receive raw wastewater (after grit removal), and secondary facultative ponds receiving settled wastewater usually from the anaerobic pond. In primary facultative ponds, the functions of anaerobic and secondary facultative ponds are combined. This type of pond is designed generally for the treatment of only slightly polluted wastewater and in sensitive locations where anaerobic ponds odour would be unacceptable. FPs are designed for BOD removal on the basis of low surface loading (unlike anaerobic ponds which are designed according to their volumetric load) and can treat water in the BOD range of 100 to 400 kg/ha/day corresponding to 10 to 40 g/m2/day at temperatures above 20C (MARA and PEARSON, 1998). The facultative ponds are covered by algae. The algae grow using the sunlight and they produce oxygen in excess to their own requirements, which they transfer to the water. It is this excess of oxygen that is used by bacteria to further break down the organic matter via aerobic digestion (oxidation) transforming the organic pollutants into CO2. Additionally to aerobic and anaerobic digestion of BOD, in the facultative ponds "sewage BOD" is converted into "algal BOD". The algal production of oxygen occurs near the surface of aerobic ponds to the depth to which light can penetrate (i.e. typically up to 500 mm). Additional oxygen can be introduced by wind due to vertical mixing of the water. Oxygen is unable to be maintained at the lower layers if the pond is too deep, and the colour too dark to allow light to penetrate fully or if the BOD and COD in the lower layer is higher than the supply. As a result of the photosynthetic activities of the pond algae, there is a diurnal variation in the concentration of dissolved oxygen. At peak sun radiation, the pond will be mostly aerobic due to algal activity, while at sunrise the pond will be predominantly anaerobic. Peak algae activity also results in a pH rise to above 9 since carbonate and bicarbonate ions react to provide more carbon dioxide for the algae, leaving an excess of hydroxyl ions. A pH above 9 for 24 hours can provide a 100% kill of E. coli and thus, most pathogenic bacteria (http://ponce.sdsu.edu/aiwps.html). At high pH, ammoniac, coming from the hydrolysis of organic nitrogen is transformed to ammonia, which is volatilised to the air. There is little evidence for nitrification and denitrification. But ammonia, as well as phosphorus is also incorporated into new algal biomass and part of this

3 of 8

15/09/2012 19:23

Waste Stabilisation Ponds

http://www.sswm.info/print/665?tid=755

is settled to the ground in non-biodegradable death algae material. Phosphorus can also be removed by precipitation as inorganic P , but it can also return through mineralization and resolubilisation into the water column. As a complete process, the facultative pond serves to: Further treat wastewater through sedimentation and aerobic oxidation of organic material Reduce odour Reduce some disease-causing microorganisms if pH raises Store residues as bottom sludge

FPs lose ammonia into the air at high pH; and settle some nitrogen and phosphorus in the sludge. FPs can result in the removal of 80 to 95% of the BOD5 (WSP 2007), which means an overall removal in the order of 95% over the two ponds (AP and FP). Total nitrogen removal in WSP systems can reach 80% or more, and ammonia removal can be as high as 95%. The HRT for a facultative pond lies between 5 to 30 days (WSP 2007). Sometimes two or more consecutively smaller facultative ponds are constructed instead of a very large one, because it is more practical for de-sludging. To remove the algae from aerobic pond, effluents rock filtration, grass plots, floating macrophytes and herbivorous fish can be used, but most commonly, the effluent flows directly in a final maturation pond.

Aerobic / Maturation Ponds (MPs)

Pathways of BOD removal in facultative waste stabilisation ponds. Source: http://nptel.iitm.ac.in/courses/Webcourse-contents/IIT-KANPUR /wasteWater/Lecture%2040.htm#Classification and http://www.rpi.edu/dept/chem-eng/Biotech-Environ/FUNDAMNT/streem/oxpond.jpg [Accessed: 07.02.2010]

Whereas anaerobic and facultative ponds are designed for BOD removal, maturation or polishing ponds are essentially designed for pathogen removal and retaining suspended stabilised solids (MARA et al. 1992; SASSE, 1998; TILLEY et al. 2008). The size and number of maturation ponds depends on the required bacteriological quality of the final effluent. The principal mechanisms for faecal bacterial removal in facultative and maturation ponds are HRT, temperature, high pH (> 9), and high light intensity. Faecal bacteria and other pathogens die off due to the high temperature, high pH or radiation of the sun leading to solar disinfection (CURTIS et al. 1992).Regarding virus removal, little is definitely known but it is generally recognised that it occurs by adsorption on to settable solids (including the pond algae) and consequent sedimentation in the anaerobic and facultative pond. Some macroorganisms such as protozoan cysts and helminth eggs are also removed by sedimentation. Maturation ponds are shallower (1 to 1.5 m), with 1 m being optimal. The recommended hydraulic retention time is 15 to 20 days (WSP 2007). If used in combination with algae and/or fish harvesting, this type of pond is also effective at removing the majority of nitrogen and phosphorus from the effluent (TILLEY et al. 2008). Some further information on the physical design is given in ARTHUR (1983) and IRC (2004).

Cost Consideration According to the International Water and Sanitation Centre (IRC), stabilisation ponds are the most cost-effective (semi-)centralised wastewater treatment technology for the removal of pathogenic microorganisms. However, this depends on the availability of land and its price. Stabilisation ponds also have the advantage of very low operating costs since they use no energy compared to other wastewater treatment

4 of 8

15/09/2012 19:23

Waste Stabilisation Ponds

http://www.sswm.info/print/665?tid=755

technologies and only low-tech infrastructure. This makes them particularly suitable for developing countries where many conventional wastewater treatment plants have failed because water and sewer utilities did not generate sufficient revenue to pay the electricity bill for the plant (IRC 2004). However, expert design is still required. Further, the ponds can be combined with aquaculture to locally produce animal feed (e.g. duckweed) or fish (e.g. fishponds). Biogas (methane and carbon dioxide) may also be recovered for use when anaerobic ponds are covered with a floating plastic membrane (PENA VARON 2004).

Operation and Maintenance

Resource Recovery and Reuse. Source: EWARDS (1990) in ROSE (1999)

Solids in the raw wastewater, as well as biomass produced, will settle out in first-stage anaerobic ponds and it is common to remove sludge when it has reached half depth in the pond. This usually occurs after 1 up to 10 or 20 years of operation. In certain instances, anaerobic ponds become covered with a thick scum layer, which is thought to be beneficial but not essential, and may give rise to increased fly breeding. To prevent scum formation, excess solids and garbage need to be removed before the wastewater enters the ponds; and pre-treatment (with grease traps) is essential to maintain the ponds (TILLEY et al. 2008). Care should be taken to ensure that plant material does not fall into the ponds as this increases the BOD content of the water. Unless it is the purpose of the pond, vegetation or macrophytes should be removed as it may provide a breeding habitat for mosquitoes and prevent light from penetrating the water column. (TILLEY et al. 2008). The WHO (WHO 2005 in MOREL & DINER 2006) does not promote pond systems if appropriate mosquito control measures are not guaranteed. If the water is reused for irrigation, the salinity of the effluent should be controlled regularly in order to prevent negative impact on the soil structure.

Health Aspects
To prevent leaching, the ponds should have a liner. The liner can be clay, asphalt, compacted earth, or another impervious material. Although effluents from maturation ponds are generally low in pathogens, the ponds should in no way be used for recreation or as a direct source of water for consumption or domestic use. A berm can protect from erosion or the invasion by vegetation and a fence can protect the lagoons from people and animals and prevent that garbage is thrown in. For the restricted and unrestricted reuse of the effluent in agri- and aquaculture, please refer to the WHO (2006) guidelines.

At a Glance

5 of 8

15/09/2012 19:23

Waste Stabilisation Ponds

http://www.sswm.info/print/665?tid=755

Working Principle

In a first pond (anaerobic pond), solids and settleable organics settles to the bottom forming a sludge, which is, digested anaerobic by microorganism. In a second pond (facultative pond), algae growing on the surface provide the water with oxygen leading to both anaerobic digestion and aerobic oxidation of the organic pollutants. Due to the algal activity, pH rises leading to inactivation of some pathogens and volatilisation of ammonia. The last ponds serves for the retention of stabilised solids and the inactivation of pathogenic microorganisms via heating rise of pH and solar disinfection. Almost all wastewaters (including heavily loaded industrial wastewater) can be treated, but as higher the organic load, as higher the required surface. In the case of high salt content, the use of the water for irrigation is not recommended. 90% BOD and TSS; high pathogen reduction and relatively high removal of ammonia and phosphorus; Total HRT: 20 to 60 days Low capital costs where land prices are low; very low operation costs Design must be carried out by expert. Construction can take place by semi- or unskilled labourers. High self-help compatibility concerning maintenance. Very simple. Removing vegetation (to prevent BOD increase and mosquito breath) scum and floating vegetation from pond surfaces, keeping inlets and outlets clear, and repairing any embankment damage. Reliable if ponds are maintained well, and if temperatures are not too low. High efficiency while very simple operation and maintenance. Large surface areas required and needs to be protected to prevent contact with human or animals

Capacity/Adequacy

Performance Costs Self-help Compatibility O&M Reliability Main strength Main weakness

Applicability
Wastewater for treatment in aerobic ponds should have a BOD5 content below 300 mg/l (SASSE 1998). Facultative and anaerobic ponds may be charged with high-strength wastewater. However, bad odour cannot be avoided reliably with high loading rates. WSPs are especially appropriate for rural communities that have large, open and unused lands, away from homes and public spaces and where it is feasible to develop a local collection system. They are not appropriate for very dense or urban areas. WSPs are particularly well suited for tropical and subtropical countries because the intensity of the sunlight and temperature are key factors for their efficiency (IRC 2004). In cold climates, the HRT and loading may be adjusted, but when mean temperatures fall below 12 C during several month of the years, WSPs seem not to be appropriate (ARTUHR 1983). WSP are also recommended for the treatment in order to reuse the effluent in agriculture and aquaculture, because of its effectiveness in removing nematodes (worms) and helminth eggs (WHO 2006, Volume II), while preserving some nutrients. If reuse is not possible, WSPs may not be adequate for areas sensitive to eutrophication (UNEP 2004).

Advantages
Can be built and repaired with locally available materials No external energy required for operation Low in construction and very low operating costs High reduction in pathogens

6 of 8

15/09/2012 19:23

Waste Stabilisation Ponds

http://www.sswm.info/print/665?tid=755

Can treat high-strength wastewater to high quality effluent Generally reliable and well-functioning Effluent can be reused in aquaculture or for irrigation in agriculture

Disadvantages
Requires large open land surfaces far away from homes and public spaces Requires expert design and supervision May promote breeding of insects in the pond (e.g. flies, mosquitoes) De-sludging (normally every few years) and correct disposal of the sludge needs to be guaranteed If the effluent is reused, salinity needs to be monitored If the nutrients in the effluent can not be reused (e.g. in agriculture), discharge can cause eutrophication Anaerobic ponds can cause bad odours if poorly designed Not always appropriate for colder climates

References
ARTHUR, J.P. (1983): Notes in the Design and Operation of Waste Stabilization Ponds in Warm Climates of Developing Countries . Washington: The World Bank. PDF Anaerobic, facultative and maturation ponds as wells as aerated lagoon systems are presented as an appropriate solution in developing countries where sewerage systems are present. The technical content was reviewed by Prof. Duncan Mara (University of Leeds, England). Detailed design, operation and maintenance guidance is given. Hence, this paper can be useful as a technical manual. CURTIS, T.P.; MARA, D.D.; SILVA, S.A. (1992): Influence of pH, Oxygen, and Humic Substances on Ability of Sunlight to Damage Faecal Coliforms in Waste Stabilization Pond Water. In: Applied and Environmental Microbiology 58, 1335-1343. URL [Accessed: 02.04.2010]. PDF This scientific article describes how solar light and oxygen lead to damage of faecal coliforms in waste stabilization ponds. Humic substances absorb the energy of the sunlight and react with surrounding oxygen, leading to the formation of toxic reactive oxygen species (ROS). DFID (Editor) (1998): Guidance Manual on Water Supply and Sanitation Programmes. London: Water, Engineering and Development Centre (WEDC) for the Department for International Development (DFID). URL [Accessed: 04.01.2011]. PDF This manual has been prepared as a tool to help improve DFID's (Department for International Developments, United Kingdom) support for water supply and sanitation projects and programmes in developing countries. Its particular focus is on how DFID assistance can best meet the needs of the urban and rural poor for water supply and sanitation services. EWARDS, P. (Editor); PULLIN, R. (Editor) (1990): Wastewater-fed aquaculture. . Calcutta, India: International seminar on wastewater reclamation and reuse for aquaculture. URL [Accessed: 18.01.2011]. PDF MARA, D.D.; PEARSON, H. (1998): Design Manual for Waste Stabilization Ponds in Mediterranean Countries. Leeds: Lagoon Technology International Ltd. MARA, D.D.; ALABASTER, G.P.; PEARSON, H.W.; MILLS, S.W. (1992): Waste Stabilization Ponds: A Design Manual for Eastern Africa.. Leeds: Lagoon Technology International. MOREL, A.; DIENER, S. (2006): Greywater Management in Low and Middle-Income Countries, Review of different treatment systems for households or neighbourhoods. Duebendorf: Swiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science (EAWAG), Department of Water and Sanitation in Developing Countries (SANDEC). URL [Accessed: 19.05.2010]. PDF This report compiles international experience in greywater management on household and neighbourhood level in low and middle-income countries. The documented systems, which vary significantly in terms of complexity, performance and costs, range from simple systems for single-house applications (e.g. local infiltration or garden irrigation) to rather complex treatment trains for neighbourhoods (e.g. series of vertical and horizontal-flow planted soil filters). WHO (Editor) (1987): Wastewater stabilization ponds: Principles of planning and practice.. Alexandria: World Health Organization Regional Office for the Eastern Mediterranean. PDF The book has been divided in two parts. Part A provides a comprehensive summary concerning the various aspects of constructing, operating and maintaining pond systems. It also considers aspects such as management and safety. Part B is intended for persons making the preliminary designs on which cost estimates and, hence, choices can be made. In particular, the appendix and annex provide a working example and a simple methodology to help the designer in preparing adequately detailed designs. VARON, M. P.; MARA, D. D. (2004): Waste Stabilisation Ponds. (pdf presentation). Delft: International Water and Sanitation Centre . URL [Accessed: 17.05.2012]. PDF This document provides information and instructions on waste stabilisation ponds. Various case studies are mentioned, e.g. the wastewater-fed fishponds in Calcutta in India. ROSE, D.G. (1999): Community-Based Technologies for Domestic Wastewater Treatment and Reuse- options for urban agriculture. Ottawa:

7 of 8

15/09/2012 19:23

Waste Stabilisation Ponds

http://www.sswm.info/print/665?tid=755

International Development Research Center Canada (IDRC). PDF The report suggests that emerging trends in low-cost, decentralised naturally-based infrastructure and urban wastewater management which promote the recovery and reuse of wastewater resources are increasingly relevant. Technologies for these sanitation options are presented. The concept of managing urban wastewater flows at a decentralised or "intermediate" level, based on micro watersheds, is explored. Effluent treatment standards that are currently accepted in order to protect public health and safety are reviewed. TILLEY, E.; LUETHI, C.; MOREL, A.; ZURBRUEGG, C.; SCHERTENLEIB, R. (2008): Compendium of Sanitation Systems and Technologies. Duebendorf and Geneva: Swiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science and Technology (EAWAG). URL [Accessed: 15.02.2010]. PDF This compendium gives a systematic overview on different sanitation systems and technologies and describes a wide range of available low-cost sanitation technologies. WAFLER, M. (2008): Training Material on Anaerobic Wastewater Treatment. Aarau: Seecon GmbH. PDF This training manual emphasizes basics of biogas technology as well as design principles and technical considerations. A sample design exercise and some technical drawings and sketches are also given. WSP (Editor) (2007): Philippines Sanitation Source Book and Decision Aid. pdf presentation. Washington: Water and Sanitation Program. PDF This Sanitation Sourcebook distils some of the core concepts of sanitation in a user-friendly format so that the book can serve as a practical reference to sanitation professionals and investment decision-makers, particularly the local governments. The annexe contains a practical collection of factsheets on selected sanitation system options. WSP (Editor) (2008): Technology Options for Urban Sanitation in India. A Guide to Decision-Making. pdf presentation. Washington: Water and Sanitation Program. URL [Accessed: 26.03.2010]. PDF These guidance notes are designed to provide state governments and urban local bodies with additional information on available technologies on sanitation. The notes also aid in making an informed choice and explain the suitability of approaches.

For further readings, case studies, awareness raising material, training material, important weblinks or the related powerpoint presentation, see www.sswm.info/category/implementation-tools/wastewatertreatment/hardware/semi-centralised-wastewater-treatments/w

8 of 8

15/09/2012 19:23