CIE4485

Wastewater Treatment
Dr.ir. Arjen van Nieuwenhuijzen
Guestlecture
5. Advanced Wastewater Treatment

Advanced Wastewater Treatment Technologies

within the EU Water Framework Directive

Dr.ir. Arjen van Nieuwenhuijzen

SeniorTechnology Advisor &Coordinator
Water,EnergyandMaterials
SectorWater Witteveen+Bos
1

Content: why, what, where and how

Why to apply advanced physical-chemical (post) treatment

What kind of technology is required

Where do we apply these technologies

How do we apply these techniques

Why, because of WFD

The European Water Framework Directive (WFD)

became effective in 2000

The WFD aims to achieve and maintain European

water bodies in a "good status", chemically as well as
ecologically by the year 2015.

Leading in the WFD goals is the sufficient removal

(2015) or zero-emission (by 2021/2027)

Why, because of these substances

Identified actual WWTP-relevant WFD substances:
(1) the nutrients nitrogen and phosphorous;
(2) certain polyaromatic hydrocarbons;
(3) the pesticides hexachlorocyclohexane, atrazine and diuron;
(4) the metal ions cadmium, copper, zinc, lead and nickel;
(5) plasticising additive DEHP (diethylhexylpthalate).

Today: Ntotal < 10 mg/l

Today: Ptotal < 1 mg/l

Future WFD: Ntotal < 2,2 mg/l

Future WFD: Ptotal < 0,15 mg/l

Why, because of these substances

N-total

P-total

Copper

Agriculture
Greenhouses
Industry
Household
Deposition

Nickel

Fluoranthene

Benzo(a)pyrene

Landfill
Traffic
Fisheries and hunting

Why, because of these substances

Identified future WWTP-relevant WFD substances:
category
hormone disrupters
medicinal substances

Substances
17 -ethinyloestradiol
bisphenol A
oestrogen
ibuprofen
anhydro-erythromycine
sulphamethoxazol
carbamazepine
sotalol
amidotrizoic acid

Identification of applicable technologies

Witteveen+Bos Consulting Engineers
KIWA Water Research
conducted exploratory research
for
STOWA
Dutch Ministery of Water & Infrasturctur
Urban Water Cycle

Identification of applicabel technologies

The efficiency of treatment techniques for the removal of
(priority) substances, which occur typically in extremely
low concentrations, is strongly influenced by the
characteristics of the effluent as a whole and the
presence of other components (the effluent matrix).

It is therefore useful to first consider the relationship

between the effluent matrix and the characteristics of
the techniques.

Identification of applicabel technologies

For the effectiveness of treatment techniques aimed at
advanced removal of the identified substances, the following
aspects were identified as being important:
Temperature
Acidity
Suspended and colloidal substances
Organic macro-molecules and degradable organic matter
e.g. NOM in wastewater influent and effluent (residual N and P)
Dissolved salts

10

Identification of applicabel technologies

To be identified as an applicable treatment technique,
the technique should fulfil the following criteria:
(potentially) capable of removing the described problematic
substances to the levels presented in the required standards;
applicable at full-scale by 2009;
capable of treating large flows;
preferably capable of removing a broad range of substances;
preferably require little energy, space and additives;
preferably producing limited amounts of byproducts.
11

Identified effective
treatment techniques
per substance
biological degradation
degradation
chemical oxidation

bounding

chemical precipitation techniques

adsorption techniques

bed filtration
separation
membrane filtration

disinfection

physical UV light / Ozone

chemical desinfection (Cl)

12

Identified
treatment
technique 1

Ultra low P-concentration

coagulation aspects:
Me/P-ratio
mixing intensity
mixing time

flocculation aspects:
mixing intensity
mixing time
13

Identified
treatment
technique 2

14

Identified
treatment
technique 3

Hybrid MBR Heenvliet

15

Identified
treatment
technique 4

16

Identified
treatment
technique 5

17

Identified
treatment
technique 6

18

Identified treatment concepts

WFD treatment concept 1

coagulation

WWTP

metal salt

bio / floc filtration

activated carbon filtration

carbon residue

backwash

c-source

discharge

WFD treatment concept 2

biofiltration

WWTP

c-source

backwash

coagulation / flocculation

metal salt

filtration

discharge
discharge

backwash
powdered activated carbon

WFD treatment concept 3

coagulation

WWTP

metal salt

c- source

bio / floc filtration

backwash

oxidation

discharge

oxidant, UV
19

How is this applied

Identified treatment concepts are:

based on physical-chemical technology

with or without smart biotechnology

fast processes -> short retention times

chemically and hydraulically design

Me/P-ratios -> efficient coagulant and flocculant dosage

C/N-ratios -> efficient carbon dosage

mixing (intensity and time)

20

Treatment costs of WDF technology

WWTP of 20,000 P.E.
= 0.18 - 0.43 EUR/m (13 - 31 EUR/P.E./year)

WWTP 100,000 P.E.

= 0.06 - 0.24 EUR/m (5 - 18 EUR/P.E./year)

highest costs: coagulation+filtration+advanced oxidation (UV/H2O2)

lowest costs: powdered activated carbon dosage + coagulation +
filtration/biofiltration (concept 2 / concept 1)

21

WFD research on large pilot scale I

WFD Test Location WWTP Horstermeer (Waterboard

of Amsterdam Waternet - The Netherlands)

1 STEP(Singel Treatment of Effluent Process)-filtration:

combination of advanced WDF technologies in one process

step:

advanced coagulation (metal salt addition)

filtration (filter bed)

biofiltration (Carbon addition)

adsorption (activated carbon)

22

WFD TEST DEMONSTRATION TREATMENT PLANT

WWTP LEIDEN ZUIDWEST (Waterboard of Rijnland)
C-source

WFD research on large pilot scale II

Static
mixer

THE NETHERLANDS

Treatment Line A

WFD Test Demonstration Site WWTP Leiden ZuidWest

WFD
effluent
(Waterboard
of Rijnland - The Netherlands)
treatment
Coagulation & /
Fase 2:

flocculation zone

AOP

line A

Active carbon
filter 1

Phase 2:
powdered
activated
carbon

Upflow
continuous
moving
sand filter

C-source

M = measurement

Static
mixer

WFD effluent
treatment line
A phase 1

Treatment Line B

WFD
effluent
treatment
line B

Active carbon
filter 2
Coagulation & /
flocculation zone

Downflow
sand filter

WFD effluent
treatment line
B phase 1

23

Conclusions

WFD requirements are emerging fast (and furious?)

High potential for physical-chemical technology:

advanced coagulation/flocculation
filtration
biofiltration
adsorption

Preferably in 1 configuration (1-STEP Filtration)

Chemically and hydraulically design optimisation

Me/P-ratios - efficient coagulant and flocculant dosage

C/N - ratios - efficient carbon dosage
mixing (intensity and time)

Cost reduction by optimised design

24

STOWA report WFD Techniques

Digital copy available

Please contact me
with business card
or visit:
www.stowa.nl

25

Goals of the research

1. Comparing One Step Total Effluent Polishing (1STEP) filter (GAC) with Dual Media Filtration (sand +
anthracite) for P removal
2. Investigate if the target value for Ptotal (<0.15 mg/L)
can be reached
(dry/rainy weather feed and day/night pattern)
3. Investigate the removal mechanism for phosphorus

26

WWTP Horstermeer
Naarden-Bussum, Hilversum-West and Nederhorst den Berg
Capacity: 200.000 p.e.
Daily Flow: 26.000 m3
Max. hydraulic load: 5,000 m3/h
Sludge load: 0,054 kg BOD/kg MLSS/d

27

Introduction Effluent quality

Parameter

Scale

Average

COD
BOD
N-total
Nkj
NO3-N
P-total
P-ortho
Suspended
solids

mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L

32
4
13.5
2.9
10.3
0.8
0.4
11

Discharge
permit

River Vecht
reduction
program

Target
concentration

14.0

5.0

2.2

1.0

0.5

0.15

28

Pilot installations

29

Process parameters - DMF

Filtration rate of 10 m/h

Filter runtime of 12 hours
MeOH/NO3-N ratio of 4.7 g/g
metal/P-ortho ratio of 4.0 mol/mol

80 cm anthracite
40 cm quartz sand

grain size: 2.0 4.0 mm

grain size: 1.25 1.5 mm

30

Process parameters 1-STEP

Filtration rate of 10 m/h

Filter runtime of 12 hours
MeOH/NO3-N ratio of 4.7 g/g
PACl dosage
PO4-P < 0,25
mol/mol
> 0,25 PO4-P
mol/mol
190 cm GAC

MeP 5
MeP 4

Grain size: 1.70 3.35 mm

31

TUDelft Phosphorus Distribution

Method
Developed in co-operation with Witteveen+Bos,

Waterboard Rijnland and Water Company Waternet

Distribution into orthophosphorus, metal bound

phosphorus, dissolved organic phosphorus and
particulate organic phosphorus

Detailed information about coagulation-, flocculationand filtration processes

Tool to compare different design and operational

settings

32

TUDelft Phosphorus Distribution

Method - Measurements

Orthophosphorus unfiltrated
Total phosphorus unfiltrated

Orthophosphorus < 0,45 m

Total phosphorus < 0,45 m

33

Phosphorus distribution
Ortho-Phosphorus
P-ortho <0,45 um

Total dissolved
Phosphorus
P-total <0,45 um

Dissolved organic
Phosphorus
P-total <0,45 um P-ortho <0,45 um

Particulate
organic Phosphorus
Total particulate Phosphorus Metal bound Phosphorus

Total particulate
Phosphorus
P-total unfiltrated P-total <0,45 um

Metal bound
Phosphorus
P-ortho unfiltratedP-ortho <0,45 um

34

P distribution WWTP Effluent (57 samples)

Orthophosphorus Dissolved "organic" P
ANBT

0,38

Particulate "organic" P

0,05

11%

Concentratie (mg/L)

30%

52%

Metal bound P

0,08

0,22

0,80
0,70
0,60
0,50
0,40
0,30
0,20
0,10
0,00

7%

Orthophosphorus
Dissolved "organic" P
Particulate "organic" P
Metal bound P

ANBT
Orthophosphorus
Metal bound P
Dissolved "organic" P
Particulate "organic" P

35

Profile Measurements

To investigate the removal through a filter bed

Samples: WWTP effluent, the upper water layer,

every 10 or 20 cm in the filter bed (by taps which
are placed on the side of the filter) and in the
filtrate

Orthophosphorus (< 0.45 m), nitrate, nitrite,

COD are measured. Additionally the oxygen
concentration.

36

37

Online Results - Dual Media

Filter
3,00

Phosphorus concentration (mg/L)

2,50

2,00

1,50

1,00
P-ortho WWTP Effluent

Ptotal Filtrate

P-ortho_metal
bound
phosphorus

0,50

0,00
01-06-08

11-06-08

21-06-08

01-07-08

11-07-08

Ptotal filtrate

Target Value Ptotal

21-07-08

31-07-08
Date (dd-mm-yy)

Portho WWTP Effluent

Portho_metal bound filtrate

38

Online Results 1-STEP Filter

3,0

Phosphorus concentration (mg/L)

2,5

2,0

1,5

1,0
Ptotal Filtrate

P-ortho WWTP Effluent

P-ortho_metal
bound
phosphorus

0,5

0,0
1-07-08

21-07-08

P-ortho WWTP Effluent

10-08-08

30-08-08

P-ortho_metal bound phosphorus

19-09-08

Ptotal Filtrate

9-10-08

29-10-08
Date (dd-mm-yy)

Target value Ptotal

39

1,2

Dual Media Filter

0,8

0,6

0,4

1,2

0,2

1-STEP filter

1,0

0,0
0,1

Portho WWTP Effluent

0,2

0,3

0,4

Portho_metal bound filtrate

0,5

Ptotal Filtrate

Phosphorus concentration (mg/L)

Phosphorus concentration (mg/L)

1,0

0,8
0,6

0,7

0,8

0,9

1,0

Portho concentration WWTP Effluent (mg/L)

0,6

0,4

0,2

0,0
0,1
P-ortho WWTP effluent

0,2

0,3

0,4

P-ortho_metal bound filtrate

0,5
Ptotal filtrate

0,6

0,7

0,8

0,9

1,0

P-ortho concentration WWTP effluent (mg/L)

40

Phosphorus concentration (mg/L)

Phosphorus distribution (14

measurements)
Dual Media Filter
1,20
1,00
0,80
0,60

0,30 mg/L
0,20

0,12 mg/L
0,04 mg/L
0,06 mg/L

0,00
WWTP Eflfuent

Percentage phosphorus form (%)

0,02 mg/L

0,09 mg/L

0,27 mg/L

0,40

0,04 mg/L

0,03 mg/L
0,11 mg/L
Upper Water Layer

100%

0,03 mg/L
Filtrate

18%

20%

90%
80%

55%

70%

40%

60%

57%

50%
40%

24%

30%

30%

6%

20%

8%

10%

19%

12%

0%

WWTP Eflfuent
Particulate "organic" P

0,01 mg/L

Upper Water Layer

Dissolved "organic" P

Metal bound P

10%
Filtrate

P-ortho

41

Phosphorus concentration (mg/L)

Phosphorus distribution (14

measurements)
1-STEP filter
1,20

0,04 mg/l

1,00

0,43 mg/L

0,80

0,86 mg/L
0,60
0,037 mg/L
0,40
0,36 mg/L
0,20

0,06 mg/L
0,13 mg/L

0,00

Percentage phosphorus form (%)

WWTP Effluent

0,042 mg/L

0,01 mg/L

0,022 mg/L

0,18 mg/L
Upper Water Layer

100%

Filtrate

0,008 mg/L

4%

90%

34%

80%

44%

70%
60%
50%

79%

39%

1%
16%

20%
7%

37%

40%
30%
20%

6%
13%

10%
0%

WWTP Effluent
Particulate "organic" P

Dissolved "organic" P

Upper Water Layer

Metal bound P

Filtrate

P-ortho

42

Profile measurement - Dual Media Filter

0,40
Bed deph (cm)
Anthracite layer

Sand layer

0,35
Metal bound Phosphorus

0,25

0,20

Orthophosphorus
0,15

0,10
Particulate "organic" Phosphorus

0,05
Dissolved "organic" Phosphorus
0,00
WWTP Effluent

UWL

Metal bound phosphorus

25

45

Orthophosphorus

65

85

105

Particulate "organic" phosphorus

Filtrate

Dissolved "organic" phosphorus

43

Profile measurement 1-STEP filter

0,40
Bed deph (cm)
0,35
Metal bound Phosphorus
0,30
Phosphorus concentration (mg/L)

Phosphorus concentration (mg/L)

0,30

0,25

0,20
Orthophosphorus
0,15

0,10
Particulate "organic" Phosphorus

0,05
Dissolved "organic" Phosphorus
0,00
WWTP Effluent

Metal bound phosphorus

UWL

25

Orthophosphorus

65

105

145

Particulate "organic" phosphorus

185

Filtrate

Dissolved "organic" phosphorus

44

Conclusions
The Dual Media Filter and the 1-STEP filter can
fulfil the target value of 0.15 mg Ptotal/L

The Dual Media Filter for 0.3 mg Portho/L in WWTP Effluent

The 1-STEP filter for 0.7 mg Portho/L in the WWTP Effluent

The removal mechanism for phosphorus is filtration

P distribution and profile measurements have

proven to be a useful tool to compare different filter
concepts

45

Overview

Study, (pilot) research, design & engineering

Conventional & advanced
Special interest:
desalination incl. pretreatment
polishing relative to (micro) organics
wastewater re-use
Brief introduction to portfolio of signature projects

46

UV/H2O2

UV disinfection & UV/H2O2 AOP

Andijk 100 MLD conventional/UV/H2O2/GAC
+ Heemskerk 150 MLD UV/H2O2/GAC +
Beerenplaat 450 MLD conventional/UV/GAC

47

UV and its applications

Recent breakthrough for primary disinfection

Traditional disinfection (chlorine, ozone)
inadequate for certain pathogens
Traditional disinfection involves by-products
(tri-halomethanes and bromate)
UV involves excessive dosage for killing
Giardia and Crypto, but
90-ies research has revealed low dosage
exposure Inactivation
UV is now a very popular crypto barrier

48

(Courtesy PWN)
Cryptosporidium

1/150 mm
49

(Courtesy PWN)
Giardia
1/300 mm

50

UV and its applications

UV is recognised as potential technology for

advanced oxidation
UV in combination with H2O2 proves to be a
successful duo:
certain organics susceptible to UV photolysis
certain organics susceptible to hydrogen
radicals (OH*)
Effective for pesticides, medicine and hormone
residuals and other trace organics

51

52

TCA

diuron

atrazine

bromacil
bentazone
2,42,4-D
53

Hogedrukpompstation

bekken

Actief kool gebouw

Locatie UV gebouw
zandfilters

dienstgebouw
inlaat

flocculatoren

54

55

Berenplaat WTW, Rotterdam

56

57

Dutch water technology @ work.

58

Heemskerk-2 (UV/H2O2-GAC)

59

Thank you for your attention

60