STP Technologies & Their Cost Effectiveness STPTechnologies&TheirCostEffectiveness

Prof.Arunabha Majumder
E i it F ll Emiritus Fellow
SchoolofWaterResourcesEngineering
Jadavpur University
ExDirectorProfessor
AllIndiaInstituteofHygiene&PublicHealth
Govt.ofIndia
Indian Scenario IndianScenario
In India cities and towns generate 38000KL waste water daily.
Sewage treatment facilities are limited in our country and Sewage treatment facilities are limited in our country and
many of the treatment facilities are not functioning properly.
The organic pollutant (measured as BOD/COD/SS) removal
performances of conventional technologies employed in a
majority of STPS under GAP/NRAP have been extensively
studied and reported. p
But microbial pollutants(measured as MPN of Total and faecal
coliforms ) removal performances are not getting monitored
l properly.
Indian Scenario (contd) IndianScenario(contd)
Total urban wastewater generation: 38255mld Totalurbanwastewatergeneration:38255mld
STPsCapacity:11788mld
S b i 38% S 28% S 20% STPsnumberwise:38%ASP,28%WSP,20%
UASB,14%others
STPscapacitywise:60%ASP,26%UASB,6%
WSP,8%others
CPCBandSPCBsaretheregulatoryagencies
forwaterqualitymonitoring q y g
MinistryofEnvironment&Forest
R d i Recommendations
MinistryofEnvironment
Parameter Notto Discharge
y
andForest,GovtofIndia
constitutedacommitteein
1999 to recommend
exceed into/on
BOD(mg/l) 30 Waterbody
1999torecommend
coliformstandardsfor
treatedsewagedischarged
BOD(mg/l) 100 Landfor
irrigation
TSS(mg/l) 50 Water body
intotheriversandlakes.
TSS(mg/l) 50 Waterbody
TSS(mg/l) 200 Landfor
irrigation g
Faecal
Coliform(MP
1000
desirable
Waterbody
orfor
N/100ml) 10000max
permissible
agriculture
and
aquaculture
MinistryofUrbanDevelopment
R d i Recommendation
MinistryofUrbanDevelopment
Parameter Value Remarks
andPovertyalleviation
constitutedintheyear2004a
committeetodeterminethe
f l f l l h
Faecal 500 Desirable
normsforcoliformlevelinthe
treatedwastewaterspecificto
thestretchoftheriverYamunain
Delhi
Coliform
(MPN/100ml)
Faecal 2500 Maximum
Delhi.
TheCommitteemadethe
followingrecommendations
which have been mentioned in
Coliform
(MPN/100ml)
Permissible
/l l
whichhavebeenmentionedin
theadjacenttable:
BOD 3mg/lorless
Standardfordischargeoftreatedsewageintothestretchof
Ri Y i D lhi RiverYamunainDelhi
Parameter Notto Remarks
Note TertiaryTreatmentafter
exceed
BOD 10mg/l Immediate
l
conventionaltreatmentprocesses
likeASPorTFisrequiredto
achievetherecommended
d d f d
goal
Faecal 2500 See
standardsforBODandFC.
TertiaryTreatmentoptions
includechemicalsaided
flocculation sedimentation with
Faecal
Coliform
2500
MPN/100ml
See
adjacent
note
flocculation,sedimentationwith
orwithoutpostgranularmedia
filtrationandorchlorination.
OverviewofWastewaterTreatmentProcesses
SewageTreatmentProcessSelection
Treated Sewage Quality : Meet Std TreatedSewageQuality:MeetStd.
PowerRequirement:Minimize
LandRequirement:Minimize
Capital Cost: Optimum Utilization CapitalCost:OptimumUtilization
O&MCost:LowerRunningCost
Waste Stabilization Pond Systems WasteStabilizationPondSystems
PerformanceoftheUnit
C li bl d hi h li Canreliablyproducehighquality
effluentwithlowBOD,SS,Faecal
coliform andhighD.O.levels.
BODreductionoftheorderof90%
orso.
Suspendedsolidsreductionis
somewhatlowduetopossible
overflowofalgae.
Coliformreductioncanbeupto6
units.
TotalNitrogenremovalbetween
7090%.
TotalPhosphorusremovalbetween
3045%.
Detentiontime:6to8days
Duckweed Pond System DuckweedPondSystem
Retentionperiod721days
Shallowdepthofwaterfrom
1.252.0mts.
For settled wastewaters BOD ForsettledwastewatersBOD
andSSremovalupto 30mg/lis
achievable
Highmineralandnutrient
removalrateduetouptakeof
duckweeds.
Capitalcostofthesameorder
ofWSPwithadditionalcostof
floatingcellmaterial. g
Facultative Aerated LAGOON (FAL) FacultativeAeratedLAGOON(FAL)
Noprimaryorsecondary
settling required with no settlingrequiredwithno
sludgerecirculation.
Anaerobicbottomlayerand
aerobictoplayer.
Simultaneousdegradation
of sludge in the bottom ofsludgeinthebottom
layerandorganicsinthetop
layer.
BODremoval7090%
Suspendedsolidsremoval
70 80% 7080%
Coliformremoval6099%
Trickling filter Tricklingfilter
Proven100yearoldtechnology
Lessmonitoringrequiredthan
ASP
Ruggedsystemwithsimpleand
silentoperation. p
Consistenteffluentquality
Standalonetreatmentprocess
forsewageifoperatedatlow
rates rates.
Tobeusedincombinationwith
ASPforefficientpeformance.
Lowpathogenremoval p g
Bacteria,2090%
Viruses5090%
Giardia cysts 70 90% Giardia cysts7090%
ActivatedSludgeProcess
(ASP) (ASP)
Provenandtestedmethodology
allovertheworldforthelast78
decades.
Severalmodificationsavailable
forspecificrequirements.
Uninterruptedpowersupply
requiredforaerationandsludge
recirculation.
Reactorsludgelevelstobe
carefullymonitoredandsludgeis
tobewithdrawnfromthesystem.
8090%removalofbacteria.
9099%removalofviruses.
BIOFORTechnology(BiologicalFiltrationand
O d R ) OxygenatedReactor)
Enhancedprimarytreatmentwith
dd f h l d additionofchemicalsand
coagulants.
Highrateprimarytubesettlers
and integrated thickening offering andintegratedthickeningoffering
spaceeconomy.
SuspendedsolidsandBOD
removaloftheorderof90%and
70%respectivelyintheprimary
clarifier.
Lowturbiditywithsuspended
lid d 15 /l d l solidsunder15mg/landtotal
systemefficiencyof98%.
Pathogenremovalof2onthelog
scale scale.
HighRateActivatedSludgeBIOFORF
T h l Technology
Compactlayoutasaresultof
highrateprocesses. g p
Higheraerationefficiency
throughdiffusedandtapered
aerationsystem. y
Spacesavingasprimary
sedimentationisdispensed.
Compliance with strict Compliancewithstrict
dischargestandards.
Absenceofaerosolandodor
nuisance in the working area nuisanceintheworkingarea.
Selfsufficientinenergy
requirementduetogasengine
based cogeneration sysytem. basedcogenerationsysytem.
Fluidized Aerated Bed (FAB) FluidizedAeratedBed(FAB)
Twostagebiologicaloxidation.
Treatmentschemewithout
primarysedimentationand
sludgedigestion.
Reactorsuptodepth5mensures
lowlandrequirement.
HighBODremovalwitheffluent g
concentrationlessthan10mg/l
HighSuspendedsolidsremoval
witheffluentconcentrationless
than20mg/l
Faecalcoliformsremovalofthe
orderof23onlogscale. g
SubmergedAerationFixedFilmTechnology
(SAFF T h l ) (SAFFTechnology)
Essentiallyatricklingfilterwith
h d l h h enhancedoxygensupplythrough
submergedaeration.
Unconventionalplasticmedia
with high void ratio and specific withhighvoidratioandspecific
surfacearea.
HighBODremovalwith98%
efficiencywitheffluentBOD y
concentrationlessthan10mg/l.
HighSuspendedsolidsremoval
witheffluentconcentrationof20
/l mg/l.
Faecal coliforms removalofthe
orderof23onlogscaleatSAFF2
Stage Stage.
Cyclic Activated Sludge Process (CASP) CyclicActivatedSludgeProcess(CASP)
Essentially activated sludge process
d i b h h h operated in batches through auto
control.
Aeration and settling in one tank
leading to lower plant foot print leading to lower plant foot print.
Uninterrupted power supply is a
must as the whole process is auto
controlled.
HighBODremovalwitheffluent
concentrationlessthan10mg/l
HighSuspendedsolidsremoval
ith ffl t t ti l witheffluentconcentrationless
than20mg/l
Faecal coliforms removalofthe
order of 23 on log scale. orderof2 3onlogscale.
UpflowAnaerobicSludgeBlanketProcess
(UASB) (UASB)
Processnotvulnerabletopower
cuts.
Recoveryofgaswithhighcalorific
value.
Lowsludgeproduction.
Noprimarytreatment,suspended
solidsinthewastewateractsas
i i l f i bi l carriermaterialformicrobial
attachment.
Recoveryofgaswithhighcalorific
value value.
Lowsludgeproduction.
PosttreatmentofUASBis
invariably required invariablyrequired.
LandAreaRequirementforDifferentSTPs
Sl.
No
STP
Process
Land
Area
Advantage Disadvantages Applicability
No. Process Area,
hectare
/MLD
1 Waste
Stabilisati
on Pond
0.80to
1.5
i) The inherent simplicity of construction offers low
cost technology option
ii) High quality effluent at least operating costs
i)Largelandrequirement
ii)Highcostoflining
iii) Risk of odour nuisance
i) Suitableunderwarm
Indianclimatic
conditions onPond
System
(WSPS)
ii) High quality effluent at least operating costs.
iii) Low skill requirement for operation of the plant.
Iv) Fish yield from aquaculture ponds around 4 7
MT/ha/year
iii)Riskofodournuisance
andmosquitobreedingiv
Riskofgroundwater
contaminationinporous
andfracturedstrata
conditions
ii) Forareaswitheasy
availabilityofland
iii) Inareaswithsocial
preferencefor
aquaculture aquaculture
iv) Inareaswithlow,
unreliableorexpensive
powersupply.
2 Duckwee
d Pond
1.5to
2.0
i) Less sensitive to low temperature, high nutrient
levels, pH fluctuations, pests and diseases
i)Lowpathogenremoval
due to reduced light
i) Lowstrengthdomestic
wastewater or after dPond
System
(DPS)
2.0 levels, pH fluctuations, pests and diseases
compared to other aquatic plants
ii) Simultaneous significant nutrient removal
iii) Yield of highly protein containing vegetative
material (35 45%) as animal feed
duetoreducedlight
penetration
ii)Duckweeddieoffincold
weatherconditions
wastewaterorafter
primarysedimentation
withinfluentBOD<
80mg/L
ii) Incombinationwith
existingWSP
iv) Duckweed as an excellent feed for poultry
v) Realization of tangible economic returns from sale
of raw or processed weed or fish
e st g S
iii) Ruralandsemiurban
settlementswitheasy
landavailability
iv)Asapolishingpondforan
existingactivatedsludge g g
plantorother
technologybasedSTPs
Contd..
Sl.
No.
STPProcess Land
Area,
Advantage Disadvantages Applicability
hectare
/MLD
3 Facultative
Aerated
Lagoon(FAL)
0.27to
0.4
i)Simpleoperationoftheplantrequiringlower
skilledmanpowerii)
Minimumcivil,electricalandmechanical
i)Possibilityof
groundwater
contaminationinporous
i)Standalonesystemfor
sewagetreatment
ii)Asanupgradation option
installation
iii)Lowerenergycostscomparedtoother
aerobicprocessesiv)
LowerO&Mcost
andfracturedstrata
ii)Highcostoflining
foroverloadWSPs
4 Trickling 0.25to i)Simpleoperationoftheplantrequiringlower i)Blockageofportsin i)IncombinationwithASPfor
Filter(TF) 0.50 skilledmanpowerii)
Ruggedsystem,lesspronetohydraulicand
organicoverloading
iii)Reducedrequirementforprocessmonitoring
iv)Sludgewithbettersettlingcharacteristics
distributionarm.
ii)Blockageofbio filter
duetoexcessbiomass
growthorfloatingmatter
iii)Riskofodour and
goodandconsistent
performance
filterfly
5 Activated
Sludge
Process(ASP)
0.15to
0.25
i)Performanceisnotsignificantlyaffecteddue
tonormalvariationsinwastewater
characteristicsandseasonalchanges
i)Performanceis
adverselyaffecteddueto
interruptioninpower
supplyevenforashort
Themostwidelyusedoption
fortreatmentofdomestic
wastewaterformediumto
largetownswherelandis
period
ii)Foamingproblemmay
occuriii)Requires
elaboratesludge
digestion/drying/disposal
scarce
arrangement
Contd..
Sl.
No.
STP Process Land
Area,
Advantage Disadvantages Applicability
hectare
/MLD
6 BIOFOR
Technology
(Biological
0.08 i) Higher aeration efficiency through co - current
diffused aeration system
ii) Able to withstand fluctuations in flow rate and
i) Continuous and
high chemical dosing
in primary
Filtration and
Oxygenated
Reactor)
organic loads
iii) Compliance with stricter discharge standards
iv) Effluent suitable for UV disinfection without
filtration
v) Absence of aerosol and odour nuisance in the
clarification
ii) Undigested sludge
from primary
clarification requiring
post treatment
working area
vi) Absence of corrosive gases in the area
7 High Rate
Activated
Sludge Biofor
0.10 i) Higher aeration efficiency through diffused and
tapered aeration system
ii) Compliance with stricter discharge standards
None, except high
high cost
- F
Technology
iii) Stable digester performance and consistent gas
production
8 Fluidized
Aerated Bed
(FAB)
0.06 i) Deep reactors enabling small space requirements
ii) Elimination of the need for sludge recirculation and
monitoring of MLSS in the reactor
i) Reliance on
patented filter
media
The FAB technology
based system is
particularly
iii) Capacity to handle shock loads
iv) Low & stabilisedsludge production eliminating the
need for sludge digestion
ii) Reliance on
flocculants,
polyelectrolyte
and chemical
disinfectant
( i l)
applicable for:
i) small to medium
flows in congested
locations
ii) Sensitive locations
iii) d li d (optional)
iii) Requires skilled
manpower
iii) decentralised
approach
iv) Reliving existing
overloaded STPs
Contd..
Sl.
No.
STPProcess LandArea,
hectare/MLD
Advantage Disadvantages Applicability
9 Submerged
Aeration Fixed
0.05 i) Deepreactors
enabling small
i) Cloggingofreactorduetoabsenceof
primary sedimentation
TheSAFFtechnologybased
system is particularly applicable AerationFixed
Film(SAFF)
Technology
enablingsmall
space
requirements
ii) Abilityto
effectivelytreat
dilutedomestic
primarysedimentation
ii) Relianceonproprietaryfiltermedia
iii) Highrelianceonexternalenergyinput
iv) Requiresskilledmanpower
systemisparticularlyapplicable
for: i)Small
tomediumflowsincongested
locationsii)Sensitive
locationsiii)
Decentralizedapproach
wastewaters
iii) Low&stabilized
sludgeproduction
eliminatingthe
needforsludge
di i
iv)Relivingexistingoverloaded
tricklingfilters
digestion
10 Cyclic
Activated
Sludge
0.120.15 i)Canbedesignedto
removeNandPalong
withcarbonremoval
i) Noprovisionforsludgemanagement
ii) Noprovisionofprimarytreatment
iii) Highrelianceonexternalenergyinput
TheCyclicActivatedSludge
Process(CASP)maybeapplicable
for:
Process
(CASP)
iv) Requiresskilledmanpower i)smalltomediumflowsin
congestedlocations
ii)Sensitivelocations
iii)decentralised approach
iv)relivingexistingoverloaded
tricklingfilters
11 Upflow
Anaerobic
Sludge
Blanket
(UASB)
0.2 0.3 i)Sludgehandlingis
minimized
ii)Powersupply
interruptionshave
minimal effect on plant
i)Ingeneralcannotmeetthedesiredeffluent
dischargestandardunlessproperposttreatment
isadopted,whichinturnmaymakethetreatment
schemeenergyintensiveormayrequirelargeland
area
Thesuitabilityofthistechnology
maybedoubtfulasastand alone
secondarytreatmentoption
(UASB)
Process
minimaleffectonplant
performance
iii)Canabsorbhydraulic
andorganicshock
loading
area
ii)Effluentisanoxicandinvariablyexerts
substantialinitial/instantaneousoxygendemand
whichmayhaveadverseimpactonreceiving
inlandwaterbodiesorwhenusedforirrigation
CapitalandO&MCostforDifferentSTPs
Sl.
No.
STPProcess Energy
Requirement
CapitalCost,Rs.Million/MLD O&MCost,million/year/MLD
o equ e e
1 WasteStabilisation PondSystem
(WSPS)
Negligible. Rs.2.5 5.0 Million/MLD Rs.0.090.15million/
year/MLD
Rs.0.250.41/m
3
2 DuckweedPondSystem(DPS) Negligible. Rs.2.5 5.0Million/MLD Rs.0.25million/MLD/year.
Rs.0.68/m
3
3 FacultativeAeratedLagoon(FAL) 18KWh/ML Rs.2.2to3.0 Million/MLD 0.15to0.2million/MLD/yr.
Rs.0.41to0.55/m
3
4 TricklingFilter(TF) 180KWh/ML Rs.4to5Million/MLD Rs.0.5million/MLD/year.
Rs.1.40/m
3
5 ActivatedSludgeProcess(ASP) 180 225
KWh/ML
Rs.5to6 Million/MLD Rs.0.5to0.7
million/MLD/Year
Rs.1.40to1.92/m
3
6 BIOFOR Technology (Biological 220 335 Rs. 10 to 12 Million/MLD RS 1.2 million/mld/Year 6 BIOFORTechnology(Biological
FiltrationandOxygenatedReactor)
220 335
kWh/ML
Rs.10to12 Million/MLD RS1.2million/mld/Year
Rs.3.30/m
3
7 HighRateActivatedSludgeBiofor F
Technology
180kWh/ML Rs.7.5 Million/MLD Rs.0.80million/MLD/Year
Rs.2.20/m
3
8 FluidizedAeratedBed(FAB) 99to170
kWh/ML
Rs6to8 Million/MLD Rs.0.9to1.0million/MLD/
kWh/ML year
Rs.2.47to2.74/m
3
9 SubmergedAerationFixedFilm(SAFF)
Technology
390kWh/ML Rs.9 Million/MLD Rs.1.4million/MLD/year
Rs.3.84/m
3
10 CyclicActivatedSludgeProcess(CASP) 150 200 Rs.11 Million/MLD Rs.1.4million/MLD/year
kWh/ML
11 UpflowAnaerobicSludgeBlanket
(UASB)Process
10 15KWh/ML Rs.3.0to4.0 Million/MLD Rs.0.12to0.17
million/MLD/Year
Rs.0.33to0.47m
3
Land(ha/MLD)areafordifferentSTPs ( / )
2.5
2 2
LandArea(ha/MLD)
1WSPS
2DPS
3 FAL
1.5 1.5
h
a
/
M
L
D
)
3FAL
4TF
5ASP
6BIOFOR Technology
7HRASBF
8FAB
0.4
0.5
0.8
0.5
1
L
a
n
d

a
r
e
a

(
9SAFF
10CASP
11USAB
0.25
0.1
0.06
0.05
0.15
0.3
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Sl.No.
CapitalCostfordifferentSTPs
14
12
11
10
12
/
M
L
D
)
CapitalCost(Rs.
Million/MLD)
6
7.5
8
9
6
8
t

(
M
i
l
l
i
o
n

R
s
.
/
5 5
3
5
6
4 4
6
C
a
p
i
t
a
l

C
o
s
0
2
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Sl No Sl.No.
O&MCostforDifferentSTPs
1.4 1.4 1.4
1.6
O&MCost
(Rs.Million/Year/MLD)
1.2
1 1
1.2
)
0.7
0.8
0 6
0.8
o
n
/
Y
e
a
r
/
M
L
D
0 25
0.5
0.4
0.6
C
o
s
t
(
R
s
.

M
i
l
l
i
o
0.15
0.25
0.2
0.17
0
0.2
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
O

&

C
Sl.No.
THANK YOU THANKYOU
NAMASKAR NAMASKAR