WEFTEC®.

06

MODELING GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS FROM ACTIVATED SLUDGE

PROCESSES

Spencer Snowling, Hugh Montieth, Oliver Schraa and Hank Andres

Hydromantis, Inc. 1685 Main St. W., Suite 302, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada, L8S1G5

ABSTRACT

Dynamic simulation of activated sludge process is a common tool for wastewater treatment
design and optimization. Most activated sludge models predict only the uptake of BOD and
nutrients, however, they can easily be supplemented with further information regarding
greenhouse gas (GHG) production to predict the generation of components such as CO2. Many
published anaerobic digestion models contain information on generation of gases, including CO2
and CH4. Implementing the CO2-supplented activated sludge and anaerobic digestion models
together in a full plant model can provide a useful way to evaluate GHG emissions under a wide
variety of operating conditions.

KEYWORDS

model, simulation, process optimization, greenhouse, digestion, CO2, CH4, GHG

INTRODUCTION

The activated sludge process has been identified as a source of significant greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions to the atmosphere (US E.P.A., 2005). Dynamic modeling and simulation can be used
to evaluate and optimize wastewater treatment processes for treatment level, energy usage,
sludge production, and a number of other factors. This paper discusses techniques for
supplementing conventional activated sludge models such as ASM1 (Henze, et al, 1987) with
new information to calculate CO2 emissions. In addition, existing dynamic-mechanistic digester
models, such as Anaerobic Digestion Model #1 (ADM1) (Batstone, 2002), model CO2 and CH4
emissions. This paper will show how GHG emissions can be modeled with a full plant model
(simulating both liquid and solids trains), allowing modelers to examine the balance between
treatment level, energy usage and GHG emission rates.

Background

Dynamic-mechanistic modeling of wastewater treatment processes has become a common tool in

the environmental engineering industry. The International Water Association (IWA) suite of
activated sludge models (e.g. ASM1, Henze et al., 1987; and ASM2d, Henze et al., 1999) were
originally developed to evaluate and optimize the biological treatment process. These models
have been supplemented with other sub-models to estimate other process-related parameters such
as airflow requirements, energy usage and interactions with toxic and/or inhibitory substances.
This same approach can be used to add new model information on CO2 emissions to
conventional activated sludge biological models.

Copyright ©2006 Water Environment Foundation. All Rights Reserved

7206
 WEFTEC®.06

LIQUID LINE MODELING

Model Matrix Notation

The model matrix approach described in the ASM1 model (Henze, et al., 1987) provides a
convenient way to supplement the existing ASM1 model with new information. Constants
describing the consumption and generation of CO2 associated with each model component (e.g.
biomass, substrate, etc.) are listed in the conservation matrix, and stoichiometry for each process
rate is generated from the mass balance of CO2. Table 1 shows the model matrix for ASM1 (for
clarity, only COD components are shown).

Table 1. COD components of ASM1, illustrating the Model Matrix concept.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Process rate
i
SI SS XI XS XB,H XB,A XU SO
j Process
Aerobic growth 1 1 − YH ⎛
μ mH ⎜⎜
SS ⎞⎛
⎟⎜
SO ⎞
⎟ X B, H
1 − 1 − ⎟⎜ ⎟
heterotrophs YH YH ⎝ K S + S S ⎠⎝ K OH + S O ⎠

Anoxic growth 1 ⎛ SS ⎞⎛ K OH ⎞⎛ S NO ⎞
2 − 1 μ mH ⎜⎜ ⎟⎜
⎟⎜ K
⎟⎜
⎟⎜ K + S
⎟ η g X B, H
⎟
heterotrophs YH ⎝ K S + S S ⎠⎝ OH + S O ⎠⎝ NO NO ⎠

Aerobic growth 4. 57 − Y A ⎛
μ mA ⎜⎜
S NH ⎞⎛
⎟⎜
SO ⎞
⎟ X B, A
3 1 − ⎟⎜ ⎟
autotrophs YA ⎝ K NH + S NH ⎠⎝ K OA + S O ⎠

Decay 1− f P fP bH X B, H
4 -1
heterotrophs
Decay 1− f P fP b A X B, A
5 -1
autotrophs
6 Ammonification k a S ND X B , H
X S / X B, H ⎡⎛ SO ⎞
kH ⎢⎜ ⎟
Hydrolysis K X + X S / X B , H ⎣ ⎜⎝ KOH + S O ⎟⎠
7 1 -1
organic compounds ⎛ KOH ⎞⎛ S NO ⎞⎤
+ η h ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟⎜⎜ ⎟⎟ ⎥ X B , H
⎝ KOH + S O ⎠⎝ K NO + S NO ⎠ ⎦

8
Hydrolysis ρ 7 ( X ND / X S )
organic N
Unbiodegradable soluble

m) -3)
unbiodegradable matter

biodegradable substrate
Readily biodegradable
substrate (g COD m-3)

particulates from cell

Active heterotrophic
matter (g COD m-3)

Active autotrophic
( CO slowly

3
Unbiodegradable

( (-COD)
)

(g COD m-3)
3
Particulate

biomass

biomass

CO
Enmeshed

Oxygen
d (g

where
fp = fraction of biomass leading to particulate products, gCOD/gCOD
YH = heterotrophic yield, gCOD/gCOD
YA = autotrophic yield, gCOD/gN
μH = heterotrophic maximum specific growth rate, 1/d
KS = readily biodegradable substrate half saturation coefficient, gCOD/m3

Copyright ©2006 Water Environment Foundation. All Rights Reserved

7207
 WEFTEC®.06

KOH = oxygen half saturation coefficient, gO2/m3

KNO = nitrate half saturation coefficient, gN/m3
ηg = anoxic growth factor, -
bh = heterotrophic decay rate, 1/d
μa = autotrophic maximum specific growth rate, 1/d
KNA = ammonia half saturation coefficient for autotrophs growth, gN/m3
ba = autotrophic decay rate, 1/d
KOA = oxygen half saturation coefficient for autotrophs growth, gO2/m3
KH = maximum specific hydrolysis rate, 1/d
KX = slowly biodegradable substrate half saturation coefficient, gCOD/gCOD
ηh = anoxic hydrolysis factor, -
ka = ammonification rate, m3/gCOD/d

The matrix is a very intuitive way to show the inter-relatedness of the model processes and
components. There is one column for each component (also known as a “state variable”), and
one row for each process in the model. Each process (e.g. cell growth, cell death, hydrolysis)
moves forward at a rate described by the kinetic equation in the right-hang column. In doing so,
the various model components are generated or consumed according to the stoichiometry in the
matrix. For example, as the heterotrophic biomass grows, it consumes (1/YH) units of soluble
substrate (Ss) and (1-YH)/YH units of oxygen (So), while producing 1 unit of biomass (XB,H).

Supplementing The ASM1 Model With CO2 Stoichiometry

A new column can be added to the matrix to supplement the existing ASM1 Model with a new
submodel which describes the mass balance of CO2. This new column for the CO2 component
contains the stoichiometry describing the production and consumption of CO2 for each process in
the model, and is shown in Table 2.

Table 2. Carbon Dioxide Stoichiometry for Wastewater Processes

i CO2 Stoichiometry
j Process
⎛ 1 ⎞
1 Aerobic growth of heterotrophs iCXB − iCSS ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟
⎝ YH ⎠
⎛ 1 ⎞
2 Anoxic growth of heterotrophs iCXB − iCSS ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟
⎝ YH ⎠
3 Aerobic growth of autotrophs iCXB
4 Decay of heterotrophs − iCXB + f P ⋅ icxu + (1 − f P ) ⋅ icxs
5 Decay of autotrophs − iCXB + f P ⋅ icxu + (1 − f P ) ⋅ icxs
6 Ammonification
7 Hydrolysis organic compounds − iCXS + icss
8 Hydrolysis organic N

Copyright ©2006 Water Environment Foundation. All Rights Reserved

7208
 WEFTEC®.06

Note that for some processes (e.g. processes 6 and 8, which are transformations of nitrogen),
there is no CO2 stoichiometry, meaning that CO2 is not consumed or produced by this process.

The newly augmented model is then capable of dynamically calculating the consumption and
generation of CO2 in the activated sludge process. The dynamic-mechanistic nature of the model
is able to simulate the daily diurnal changes in CO2 production as the activated sludge process
deals with changes in influent flow and organic loading.

A similar approach, using supplemental stoichiometry to determine CO2 generation from BOD
and/or COD removal has been used by Monteith, et al., (2005) and others. In most cases,
however, the approach is for steady-state modeling only. The approach described above, where
a mechanistic model such as ASM1 is appended with further sub-models for CO2 mass balance,
creates a dynamic tool that is capable at evaluating changes in CO2 production over time.

SOLIDS LINE MODELING: ADM1 GAS EMISSIONS

The anaerobic digestion model ADM1, as published, contains gas consumption/generation and
transfer models for CO2 and CH4, and therefore does not require any supplementation. This
allows engineers to be able to dynamically estimate mass emissions of GHG compounds from
wastewater treatment plants, including an understanding of the balance between GHG emissions
from aerobic vs. anaerobic processes.

ADM1 models several different biomass populations, each of which breaks down various types
of COD. The biological model matrix is large and complex, and beyond the scope of this paper
(for details please see Batstone, et al., 2002, and Rosen and Jeppsson, 2002). However, a
simplified summary of the ADM1 model is shown in Figure 1.

Composite Material Inert Material

Carbohydrate Proteins Lipids

Monosaccharides Amino Acids Long-chain FAs

Short-chain FAs
Hydrogen
Methane
Acetate

Figure 1. Simplified ADM1 Model Structure.

Copyright ©2006 Water Environment Foundation. All Rights Reserved

7209
 WEFTEC®.06

Note that the anaerobic breakdown of the composite COD material produces acetic acid and
hydrogen gas, which are subsequently utilized by methanogens, producing methane. CO2
production and consumption at various stages of the digestion process are also modeled.

Wastewater Plant Emissions Example

Figure 2 illustrates a conventional activated sludge plant model, as shown in the GPS-X
wastewater modeling software. The plant includes aeration basins, secondary activated sludge,
and digestion. Note that in this model, the influent arrow represents a wastewater stream that has
been characterized as primary clarifier effluent.

Figure 2. Sample Wastewater Plant – GPS-X Model.

Figure 3 illustrates the results of a typical wastewater simulation. MLSS and aeration basin
dissolved oxygen are shown for a 1-day simulation with an influent that fluctuates in a diurnal
pattern (both for load and flow rate). Effluent BOD, TSS, and TKN are shown in Figure 4. Note
that the effluent quality is at a conventionally acceptable level.

Copyright ©2006 Water Environment Foundation. All Rights Reserved

7210
 WEFTEC®.06

Figure 3. Diurnal Fluctuations in DO level and MLSS.

Figure 4. Diurnal Fluctuations in Effluent Quality.

Figure 4 illustrates the results of the CO2 emissions from the aeration basin, as well as the CH4
emission from the digester. Note that the dynamic model not only allows engineers to estimate
CO2 and CH4 production, but also see how the emissions vary throughout the day.

Copyright ©2006 Water Environment Foundation. All Rights Reserved

7211
 WEFTEC®.06

Figure 5. CO2 and Methane Production from Activated Sludge Process.

CONCLUSIONS

These types of models provide the process engineer with a tool that can estimate the amount of
GHG emissions under different operating conditions, and weighed against the corresponding
level of treatment and operational energy cost. This tool can therefore be used by decision-
makers to evaluate the contribution of wastewater treatment plants to the global GHG problem,
and to evaluation options for mitigation of the emissions while still maintaining an acceptable
level of treatment.

REFERENCES

Batstone D.J., Keller J., Angelidaki I., Kalyuzhnyi S.V., Pavlostathis S.G., Rozzi A.,
Sanders W.T.M., Siegrist H. and Vavilin V.A. (2002) Anaerobic Digestion Model No.1
(ADM1). IWA Scientific and Technical Report #13. IWA Publishing, London, England.

Henze M., Grady C.P.L. (Jr), Gujer W., Marais G.v.R and Matsuo T. (1987) Activated Sludge
Model No.1. IAWQ Scientific and Technical Report No.1, IAWQ, London. 33pp.

Henze M., Gujer W., Mino T., Matsuo T., Wentzel M.C., Marais G.v.R. and Van Loosdrecht
(1999) Activated sludge model No. 2d. Wat. Sci. Tech., 39 (1), 165-182.

Monteith, H., Sahely, H., MacLean, H., and D. Bagley, A Rational Procedure for Estimation of
Greenhouse-Gas Emissions from Muncipal Wastewater Treatment Plants, Water
Environment Research, 77 (4), 390-403.

Rosen, C., and Jeppsson, U. (2002) Anaerobic COST Benchmark Model Description, Version
1.2., Department of Electrical Engineering and Automation, Lund University, Sweden.

Copyright ©2006 Water Environment Foundation. All Rights Reserved

7212