Freshwater systems, resources and society

A different water cycle

Biological Waste Water Treatment

Paris, 21. 11. 2008

Prof. Helmut Kroiss

Institute for Water Quality, Resource and Waste
Management Vienna University of Technology
 Materials and Water cycle
Precipitation
evapo(transpi)ration

Waste Water
Drinking Treatment
non biodegradable
water substances
micro-pollutants

Sludge
nutrients Rivers
water for hazardous comp. lakes
industry
Sea
N, P
Nutrition Soil
Our needs materials
demands energy
chemicals
 Conventional waste water treatment
plant configuration
Mechanical treatment Biological treatment
Screen Grit chamber Primary Settling

AT SST

Sludge Excess Sludge

Thickening Sludge treatment

Stabilisation Dewatering Incineration

Disposal
return flows landfill
from sludge
treatment Sludge disposal
agricultural use,
landscaping
 Biological treatment processes

Bacteria and other microorganisms use waste water

pollution as their nutrition and grow as this happens in
natural waters or soils:
Þ in/on free floating flocs, separation from the treated
effluent by sedimentation or membranes (activated
sludge process, MBR)
Þ on a support medium (slag, stones, clay and plastic
material, soil particles); only excess sludge separated
from treated effluent by sedimentation or filtration
(trickling filters, biofilters, rotating disks, constructed
wetlands, etc.)
 Schematic View of Bacterial Cells
Pili (hairs)
N
N … (degradable) substrates N Cell-wall
(-ions, e.g. CH3COO-)
N+E E Cell-membrane
E … Enzymes for breakdown and
transport of substrates N+ N Cytoplasm
-
N
A … „excrements“ DNA
(e.g. CO2) metabolism (genetic
(strongly information)
simplified)
amplification ~100.000 times A
A
flagella

Bacteria have only direct access to dissolved material. Solid pollution and many
complex org. compounds have to be pre-treated by enzymes emitted by the bacteria.
 Five Laws of Applied Microbiology
in Biotechnology
• The micro organism is always right, your friend and
a sensitive partner.
• There are no stupid micro organisms.
• Micro organisms can and will do everything.
• Micro organisms are smarter, wiser, more energetic
than chemists, engineers and others.
• If you take care of your microbial friends they
will take care of your future.
D. Perlman, 1980
How metabolism of bacteria is controlled?

0
concentration of limiting substrate

Monod-equation
V substrate utilisation rate [g/g/d]

vmax

Vmax, KM are characteristic for bacterial strain

vmax

S
Michaelis Menten : v = v max ⋅
KM + S

limiting substrate concentration [mg/l]

 Biological Substrate Removal Equilibrium

Conversion rate, growth rate,

µ vmax
[g/g.h] v

µ v S
2 2 v = vmax
K+S

Monod / Michaelis
? Menten
No experimental
results!
0 S [ng/l]

0 K S [ng/l]
Concentration of limiting substrate
 10

In “clean” environments In “polluted” environments (nutrients do

co-operation and frugality not limit growth) competition is
determine competition controlled by genetically determined
maximum growth rate
µ

high low
biodiversity biodiversity

« survival of the fittest »

depends on substrate availability
0
conc.
 Adsorption Equilibrium
a
a∞

c
a = a∞ ‚
kc+ c a∞, kc : Constants depending on
adsorbents and adsorbing compound

kc „effluent“ concentration
 Removal of organic
carbonaceous pollution

endproducts
aerobic
pollution + « air »
org. C + oxygen (O2) +
energy requirement

sludge
biologically inert
solids
decay
heterotrophic bacteria
 Nitrification
from Ammonia to Nitrate

strict aerobic
org. N
nitrate
nitrite
NH4-N + oxygen (O2)
Ammonia + “air”
sludge
(org. C)

autotrophic nitrifying bacteria

 Nitrogen removal by
denitrification

N2Ç(gas), CO2Ç
anoxic
H2O

Nitrification sludge
(biomass)
heterotrophic,
C-consuming bacteria
 De-ammonification
Removal of ammonia from wastewaters
poor in carbon source

“aerobic denitrification”
biofilm

“anoxic” NH4-N
NH4-N
O2
2
~50% NO2-N
nitrite
CX
“aerobic”
“ANAMMOX”
„DAEMON“
actually applied for sludge liquors
 Biological Waste Water
Treatment Processes
Can be characterised by:
Prevailing environmental conditions
- aerobic processes (with oxygen)
- anaerobic processes (without oxygen)
Bacterial growth pattern
- attached to support material (fixed film)
- suspended flocks
Area requirements for plant construction
- high (>>1m²/PE)
- low (<<0,5m²/EW)
 Aerobic treatment
processes
„natural“ „technological“ bacterial growth
constructed trickling filter, bio-discs, attached
wetlands (1) bio-filters (1)
waste water ponds (3) Activated sludge (2) suspended flocks

All these processes are derived from natural, so called “self purification
processes”:
• in soils (especially agricultural soils) (1)
• in rivers (especially in large rivers) (2)
• in polluted (shallow) lakes (3)

Anaerobic processes (in hot climates):

only C-removal, energy “production”?
 Fixed Film Reactor Technology
wastewater wastewater
organic
bacteria pollution
biofilm

support
material support
material aerobic

anaerobic

biomass + water
(excess sludge)

diffusion limited
Suspended flocks

water protozoa

O2
O2

filamentous bacteria
sludge flock
O2
pollution O2
(dissolved, suspended)
 WWTP Area Requirements
Ö “Natural” processes: 2 to 10 m²/PE
Ö Conventional mechanical/biological treatment
plants including sludge treatment:
0,13 to 0,25 m²/PE
Ö Biofilters, Membrane Bioreactors including sludge
treatment:
0,1 to 0,15 m²/PE
Ö further reductions in space requirement by plants
with several floors (< 0,05 m²/PE)
Ö Criterion: costs for land (10 to 5000 €/m²)
 21

Influence of area costs

on investment costs of large WWTPs
total costs= Construction + Land
€/PE
1200
1100
1000
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200 construction
100 costs
0
1 10 100 1000 10000 €/m²
[Kroiss 2002]
 Design basis for
waste water treatment plants
For the design of waste water treatment plants the
following information has to be fixed:
Þ Design load (kg/d, m³/h)
(pollution loads expressed as PE or kg COD/d, the maximum
hourly design flow m³/h)
Þ treatment efficiency requirement
(effluent concentrations mg/l, or removal efficiency % for
COD, NH4-N, NO3-N, TP, TN, etc.,

maximum input to the treatment plant and allowable

output to the receiving water have to be defined for
design with statistical definition and sampling
procedure (e.g.; EU-UWWD)
 Scheme of a Trickling Filter Plant
trickling filter

primary air
sedimentation
influent
clarifier
effluent

air

primary excess
sludge sludge
 Biofilter technology
low space requirements, especially suitable for nitrification
e.g following chemically enhanced primary sedimentation
 Activated sludge process

1 aeration tank 3 secondary

sedimentation tank

influent effluent

2 aeration

4 return sludge excess sludge

Most important waste water treatment process worldwide

 Membrane“Bioreactor“
effluent
no suspended solids
Zul.
nitrification,
denitrification
P-precipitation

excess sludge vacuum

effluent
membrane

vacuum

hollow fibre membranes flat sheet membranes

 Activated sludge process
with phosphorus precipitation

chemical aeration secondary

addition tank sedimentation tank

or or

Q [m³/h] 2Q Q [m³/h]
TSBB [kg/m³]
influent effluent

aeration

TSRS = 2 TSRS Q [m³/h]

return sludge excess sludge,

contains P-removed
 ASP with
N-Removal by Denitrification

C-removal
denitrification nitrification secondary
(anoxic) (aerobic) sedimentation tank

aeration
influent effluent
aeration tank

recirculation

return sludge excess sludge

 ASP with biological
nitrogen and phosphorus removal

anaerobic anoxic aerobic secondary

sedimentation tank
aeration

influent aeration tank effluent

recirculation

return sludge excess sludge,

contains P-removed
 Technological limits for effluent quality and
removal efficiencies (municipal WW)
Effluent concentrations (95%ile daily composite
sample):
Þ C: 10 mg BOD5/l
Þ N: 1 mg NH4-N/l
Þ P: 0,5 mg P/l (with simultaneous precipitation)
With MBR even lower concentrations can be achieved
Removal efficiencies (depend on influent
concentrations and WW composition):
Þ BOD: 97-99%
Þ COD: 90-94%
Þ N: 80 -90 %
Þ P: 80 – 95%
 Technological limits for effluent quality and
removal efficiencies (municipal WW)
Low ammonia effluent concentrations are the best
indicator for high and reliable biological treatment
efficiency for organic carbonaceous material
(Monitoring!)
Low energy requirements (together with low ammonia
concentrations) are the best indicator for optimum
nitrogen removal and plant efficiency
Enhanced biological P-removal and chemical
precipitation are compatible if properly controlled
MBR application is mainly relevant for hygienic quality
(bathing waters) and for reuse of WWTP-effluent
 Removal of micro-pollutants

high MCRT°C and changing redox conditions (aerobic,

anoxic, anaerobic) are decisive factors for effluent
quality and reliability.
Biodegradable micro-pollutants follow the same
dependency
Adsorbable micro-pollutants follow the adsorption
characteristics of the compounds and the
adsorption capacity of bacteria (→Sludge)
Non biodegradable and adsorbable compounds can
be stripped to the air or will not be reduced
Zero effluent concentrations can never be achieved!
Octylphenol (OP) and octylphenolethoxylates
(OP1,2EO)
ƒ Higher removal up to >95% with increasing SRT

120
Bisphenol-A
Bisphenol-A 100
ƒ A nearly complete removal is

removal [%]
80
observed at SRT10°C >10 days
60

40

20

0
0,5 1 2 5 10 20 50 100 200
[Clara et.al. 2005] SRT10°C [d]
Natural hormones (E1, E2 and E3)
ƒ Removal dependent on the SRT
E1+E2+E3
120

ƒ High removal rates (>95%) at 100

SRT10°C higher than 10 days 80

removal [%]
60
LP
40 WWTP 1
WWTP 4
WWTP 2
20 WWTP 3
MBR

0
0,5 1 2 5 10 20 50 100 200
SRT10°C [d]
17a-ethinylestradiole (EE2)
ƒ More persistent than natural hormones [Clara et. al. 2005]
ƒ Effluent concentrations between 1 and 5 ng/l
ƒ Enhanced removal with increasing SRT
 Conclusions
Biological waste water treatment with full nitrification represents a very
cost efficient tool for achieving sustainable river protection
Reasonable requirements for nitrogen removal (70 to 80 % as a yearly
mean) reduce energy consumption and contribute to abate
eutrophication
Reasonable requirements for P-removal are an efficient tool to prevent
eutrophication of lakes and coastal areas and is a prerequisite to
reduce losses of this valuable resource to the seas
The EU-UWWD requirements for sensitive areas, wisely interpreted,
represent an economically sound tool to achieve a low and
acceptable risk for water quality management in most areas of
Europe
For waste water discharge to bathing waters or other very sensitive
receiving waters as well as in the case of direct reuse of the treated
effluent Membrane technology (MBR) can be an advantageous
solution.
Many micro-pollutants are efficiently reduced by biological treatment
with long SRTs but others are not or only little affected.