DOCSLIB.ORG

Council Work Session Communication ______Biosolids Alternatives Evaluation

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Council Work Session Communication ______Biosolids Alternatives Evaluation Council Work Session Communication ________________________________________________________________________________ Biosolids Alternatives Evaluation Meeting Date: June 20, 2016 Primary Staff Contact: Lila Bradley Department: Public Works E-Mail: [email protected] Secondary Dept.: Public Works Secondary Staff Contact: Joe Whisler Approval: Ronald Chandler Estimated Time: 2 hours ____________________________________________________________________________________________ Objective Council will be presented with options on how to manage the City’s biosolids or sewer sludge. The presentation will include capital costs, maintenance costs, advantages and disadvantages of each option. Background The City’s wastewater treatment plant currently produces a Class B liquid bio-solids. Since 1993, our practice has been to apply Class B bio-solids onto fields in the Siletz Valley. This practice has afforded us relatively inexpensive bio-solids management. We began to experience the trend of fewer available fields in 2005-2006 and also had fewer contractors bidding on the dredging/hauling projects. The number of available fields continued to become increasingly limited, but in the past two years we have experienced a significant decline. Last year we applied 600,000 gallons out of the 2 million gallons produced per year. This year we have completed testing and found there are no fields available. We have been building an excess inventory in the holding lagoons and we need to remove sludge within the next few months. To address the immediate need, our consulting engineers from Kennedy/Jenks Consulting have been researching and negotiating prices from vendors to remove the bio-solids in the lagoons. Staff is also obtaining quotes and estimating costs for renting equipment. Classifications There are two methods used in the industry to manage solids: Aerobic Digestion and Anaerobic Digestion. Understanding the difference between the two methods is important to this discussion. Page 1 of 2 1. Aerobic digestion is a biological process that takes place in the presence of oxygen. With oxygen, bacteria present in the sludge (activated sludge) consume organic matter and converts it into carbon dioxide. We currently are using this process. 2. Anaerobic Digestion is a collection of processes by which microorganisms break down biodegradable material in the absence of oxygen. Converting our existing Aerobic digesters to anaerobic digesters was considered in the alternative evaluation. Also fundamental to the discussion is the type of sludge produced by the treatment process. Sludge can be treated to Class A or Class B. 1. Class A biosolids contain very very small levels of pathogens and can be land applied without restrictions. Class A bio-solids can be bagged and marketed to the public for application to lawns and gardens. Class A can only be achieved by thermal drying. 2. Class B biosolids have less stringent standards for treatment and contain small amounts of bacteria. Class B requirements ensure that pathogens in biosolids have been reduced to levels that protect public health and the environment and include certain restrictions for crop harvesting, grazing animals and public contact for all forms of Class B bio-solids. Alternatives For this work session, our consulting engineers from Kennedy/Jenks will be presenting the long term options to address our solids capacity and disposal. The options are: 1. Aerobic Class B 2. Aerobic Class A 3. Anaerobic Class B 4. Anaerobic Class A 5. Buy our own fields to land apply Class B 6. Privatizing dredging/dewatering/hauling Class B to landfill 7. Leasing dewatering equipment for near-term disposal Attachments: 2016 Biosolids Alternative Evaluation Report Page 2 of 2 421 SW 6th Ave, Suite 1000 Portland OR 97204 503-423-4000 FAX: 503-295-4901 City of Lincoln City WWTP Biosolids Alternatives Evaluation 6 May 2016 Prepared for City of Lincoln City 5000 SE Port Avenue Lincoln City, Oregon 97367 K/J Project No. 1576028 Table of Contents List of Tables ............................................................................................................................... ii List of Figures............................................................................................................................. iii List of Appendices ...................................................................................................................... iii List of Acronyms ......................................................................................................................... iv References ..................................................................................................................................v Section 1: Introduction and Problem Definition ........................................... 1 1.1 Authority and Purpose .......................................................................... 1 1.2 Existing WWTP Facility Overview ........................................................ 1 1.2.1 WWTP Liquids Process Overview ............................................. 1 1.2.2 WWTP Solids Process Overview .............................................. 3 1.3 WWTP Biosolids Challenges (Problem Definition) ................................ 3 1.4 Biosolids Storage, Beneficial Reuse, and Disposal .............................. 4 1.4.1 Federal and State regulations ................................................... 4 1.4.2 Class B Biosolids ...................................................................... 4 1.4.3 Class A Biosolids ...................................................................... 5 1.4.4 WWTP Class B Biosolids Evaluation ......................................... 5 1.5 City WWTP Flow and Load Projections ................................................ 5 Section 2: Alternatives Development ........................................................... 8 2.1 Introduction to Alternatives ................................................................... 8 2.2 Digestion ............................................................................................ 10 2.2.1 Aerobic Digestion .................................................................... 10 2.2.2 Anaerobic Digestion ................................................................ 11 2.2.3 Solids Dewatering (Class B Biosolids) ..................................... 20 2.3 Solids Drying (Class A Biosolids) ....................................................... 21 2.3.1 Belt Dryer ................................................................................ 22 2.3.2 Paddle Dryer ........................................................................... 22 2.4 Dewatering and Drying Equipment Pilot Testing................................. 23 Section 3: Alternatives Evaluation Methodology ........................................ 25 3.1 Triple Bottom Line Analysis ................................................................ 25 3.1.1 Triple Bottom Line Evaluation Procedure ................................ 26 3.2 Capital Cost Estimate Methodology.................................................... 26 3.2.1 20-Year Lifecycle Cost Estimating Methodology ...................... 27 3.3 Potential Outside Funding Sources .................................................... 27 3.3.1 Energy Trust of Oregon ........................................................... 27 3.3.2 Oregon Department of Energy ................................................ 28 3.3.3 The Bonneville Environmental Foundation .............................. 28 WWTP Biosolids Alternatives Evaluation, City of Lincoln City i y:\projects\2015proj\1576028.00_lincoln_city_biosolids\09_reports-memos\9.09_report\biosolids report\lc_tm_final_6may2016.doc Section 4: Alternatives Evaluation ............................................................. 29 4.1 Alternative 1 - Aerobic Digestion, Solids Dewatering and Class B Biosolids ......................................................................................... 29 4.2 Alternative 2 - Aerobic Digestion, Solids Dewatering, Solids Drying and Class A Biosolids ............................................................. 31 4.3 Alternative 3 - Anaerobic Digestion, Solids Dewatering and Class B Biosolids ............................................................................... 33 4.4 Alternative 4 - Anaerobic Digestion, Solids Dewatering, Solids Drying and Class A Biosolids ............................................................. 35 4.5 Alternatives Evaluation Summary ....................................................... 37 4.6 Alternatives Evaluation Findings ........................................................ 39 Section 5: Recommended Plan and Next Steps ......................................... 40 5.1 Discussion .......................................................................................... 40 5.2 Recommended Plan ........................................................................... 40 5.3 Next Steps ......................................................................................... 41 List of Tables Table 1-1. City WWTP Design Flow and Load Comparison ........................................................ 6 Table 1-2. Current and Design Secondary WAS Rates .............................................................. 6 Table 1-3. Dewatering Loading Characteristics .......................................................................... 7 Table 2-1. Summary of Dewatering and Drying Pilot Test Results ...........................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Challenges and Incentives for Sustainable Manure Management in Russia
    Challenges and incentives for sustainable manure management in Russia Johanna Lindgren Master’s Thesis in Soil Science Agriculture Programme – Soil and Plant Sciences Examensarbeten, Institutionen för mark och miljö, SLU Uppsala 2013 2013:03 SLU, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences Faculty of Natural Resources and Agricultural Sciences Department of Soil and Environment Johanna Lindgren Challenges and incentives for sustainable manure management in Russia Supervisor: Helena Aronsson, Department of Soil and Environment, SLU Assistant supervisor: Ola Palm, JTI & Nina Geladze-Ekstedth, JTI Examiner: Barbro Ulén, Department of Soil and Environment, SLU EX0728, Independent project/degree project in Soil Science, 30 credits, Advanced level, A1E Agriculture Programme – Soil and Plant Sciences 270 credits (Agronomprogrammet – inriktning mark/växt 270 hp) Series title: Examensarbeten, Institutionen för mark och miljö, SLU 2013:03 Uppsala 2013 Keywords: manure management, Russia, sustainable, eutrophication, agricultural policies, Baltic Sea Online publication: http://stud.epsilon.slu.se Abstract The Baltic Sea is threatened by eutrophication that largely is due to nutrient leaching from farmland within the catchment area. To solve this problem the surrounding countries cooperate within various configurations such as HELCOM and the EU-financed project Baltic Compass. Poor manure management in Russia has been discussed frequently the last couple of years. A literature review of different types of reports and legal acts is the core of this degree project which has been performed in connection to two ongoing research projects financed by EU (Baltic Compass) and SIDA. It is supplemented with interviews with Swedish agricultural consultants and travel reports from two occasions when I had the opportunity to discuss with Russians active within the agricultural sector.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Brochure
    4&1"3"5*0/ $0/7&:*/(&26*1.&/5 Hebei GN Separation & Conveying Equipment Co.,Ltd. &RQWHQW 3DUW&RPSDQ\3UR¿OH ………………………………………… 3 1.1 Company Introduction …………………………………… 3 1.2 GN No.1 Factory ………………………………………… 4 1.3 GN No.2 Factory ………………………………………… 5 1.4 GN Solids America ……………………………………… 6 *1&HUWL¿FDWHV …………………………………………… 7 3DUW'HFDQWHU&HQWULIXJH ……………………………………… 8 2.1 GN Industry Decanter Centrifuge ………………………… 8 2.2 GN Centrifuge VFD Control Panel ……………………… 9 2.3 Fully Hydraulic Drive Centrifuge ………………………… 10 2.4 T Series Decanter Centrifuge …………………………… 11 2.5 Y Series Decanter Centrifuge …………………………… 13 2.6 C Series Decanter Centrifuge …………………………… 14 2.7 3 Phase Decanter Centrifuge ……………………………… 15 3DUW'LVF6WDFN6HSDUDWRU …………………………………… 16 3.1 Disc Stack Separator Introduction …………………………16 3.2 Disc Separator 2-Phase …………………………………… 17 3.3 Disc Separator 3-Phase …………………………………… 18 3DUW'HZDWHULQJ6FUHZ3UHVV ………………………………… 19 4.1 Dewatering Screw Press Introduction …………………… 19 4.2 Dewatering Screw Press Model ………………………… 20 3DUW&RQYH\LQJ(TXLSPHQW …………………………………… 21 5.1 Solids Vacuum Pump ………………………………………21 5.2 Centrifugal Sand Pump …………………………………… 22 5.3 Screw Pump ……………………………………………… 23 5.4 U-Type Screw Conveyor ………………………………… 24 5.5 Tube Type Screw Conveyor ……………………………… 25 3DUW2WKHU6HSDUDWRU ………………………………………… 26 6.1 Vertical Screen Scroll Centrifuge ………………………… 26 ,QFOLQHG3ODWH&ODUL¿HU …………………………………… 27 6.3 Oil Water Separator ……………………………………… 28 2 Content www.gnseparation.com Part 1: &RPSDQ\3URÀOH &RPSDQ\,QWURGXFWLRQ Hebei GN Separation & Conveying Equipment Co.,Ltd manufacture industrial separation equipment and convey- ing equipment. The GN Brand has been in the industry since 2007. Our manufacture plant is close to Beijing, Chi- na. But our products have been exported to over 70 countries in the world.
    [Show full text]
  • CITY of SILVERTON CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA Silverton Community Center – Council Chambers – 421 South Water St
    CITY OF SILVERTON CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA Silverton Community Center – Council Chambers – 421 South Water St. Americans with Disabilities Act – The City of Silverton intends to comply with the A.D.A. The meeting location is accessible to individuals needing special accommodations such as a sign language interpreter, headphones, or other special accommodations for the hearing impaired. To participate, please contact the City Clerk at 503- 874-2216 at least 48 hours prior to the meeting. A copy of the packet and materials, not privileged information under Executive Session Meetings Law, are available for review Monday through Friday 8:00 am to 5:00 pm in the City Manager’s Office at the Silverton City Hall, located at 306 South Water Street. All documents will be available on our website at www.silverton.or.us. Monday, July 17, 2017, 7:00 PM I. OPENING CEREMONIES – Call To Order, Pledge Of Allegiance & Roll Call II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES – Minutes from the Work Session held March 13, 2017, Special Meeting held March 13, 2017 and the Regular Meeting held June 5, 2017 III. OATHS OF OFFICE/PUBLIC RECOGNITION – None Scheduled IV. PUBLIC COMMENT – This is a business meeting of the City Council. The City values and welcomes public input. Please address the Council as a whole and not individual Council Members. Do not address Staff or members of the audience. Council action on items brought up in Public Comment is limited by the Open Meeting Law. The Council may direct Staff to study the matter and reschedule for further consideration at a later date.
    [Show full text]
  • Proposed Renewable Energy Center
    Proposed Renewable Energy Center University of Wisconsin-Platteville Pioneer Farm October 2010 Project Number 004065-090001-0 1203 STORBECK DRIVE WAUPUN, WI 53963 Tel 920-324-8600 Fax 920-324-3023 www.bonestroo.com PROPOSED RENEWABLE ENERGY CENTER October 1, 2010 Prepared for: University of Wisconsin-Platteville Prepared by: Bonestroo 1203 Storbeck Drive Waupun, Wisconsin 53963 Project Number: 004065-09001-0 Marty L. Koopman, PG Thomas G. Dye Team Leader Senior Project Manager PROPOSED RENEWABLE ENERGY CENTER – UW-PLATTEVILLE Table of Contents Executive Summary .............................................................................................................. 1 I) Background ...................................................................................................................... 2 II) Digester Discussion ......................................................................................................... 3 III) Energy Use .................................................................................................................... 6 IV) Feed Stocks ................................................................................................................... 9 V) Biodiesel Plant ................................................................................................................ 12 VI) Logistics ....................................................................................................................... 16 VII) Cost Analysis ..............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Dewatering Screw Press
    Product brochure Dewatering Screw Press Copyright by CTST. All rights reserved including the right to reproduce this document or portions thereof in any form. All information is subject to change. Rev.02 July 2018 Summary… This brochure contains detailed information about the VSP Screw Press. The VSP dewatering screw press series is often used for materials which are difficult to press, for example that tend to pack together. The press continuously takes the liquid out of the feed mixture by compressing them in a decreasing channel between a screw shaft and screen mantle. The amount of solids in feed, characteristics of feed, type of the screen used and operational pressure are the major factors that influences the efficiency of separation. This brochure thoroughly will touch upon how we developed, applicability, benefits and working principle of the dewatering screw press as well our contact information. Introduction… CTST is a Dutch based company. With over 20-year experience we are a renowned name in the customized separation and filtration industry worldwide. Over the years we enabled our customers to re-use materials, save energy and lower costs. We are determined to execute more tailor-made projects for our customers and hereby achieve our mission statement: An environmentally sustainable future for the generations to come. We joined forces with a group of Dutch companies striving for the same ideas we have: NETG (Netherlands Environmental Technology Group) and the Water Alliance (institution for the development of sustainable water technology. Besides this we have close relationships with NGOs, local governments such as the Chinese and Dutch government.
    [Show full text]
  • Green Processing of Napier Grass for Generation Of
    GREEN PROCESSING OF NAPIER GRASS FOR GENERATION OF BIOFUEL AND BIOBASED PRODUCTS A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE DIVISION OF THE UNIVERSITY OF HAWAIʻI AT MĀNOA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN MOLECULAR BIOSCIENCES AND BIOENGINEERING DECEMBER 2012 By Devin T. Takara Dissertation Committee: Samir Kumar Khanal, Chairperson Andrew G. Hashimoto Jon-Paul Bingham Soojin Jun Richard M. Ogoshi John F. Yanagida Keywords: Napier grass, green processing, biofuel, biobased products, biorefinery ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to express my sincerest gratitude to my advisor, Dr. Samir Kumar Khanal, for affording me an excellent opportunity to learn and grow, both as a person and as an aspiring researcher in the field of bioenergy and sustainability. Thank you for your uncompromising generosity, mentorship, and friendship. I would also like to express my thanks to Dr. Jon-Paul Bingham for his endless support and for taking much time to teach me the art of HPLC analysis, Dr. Richard M. Ogoshi for his tremendous help in the field and unrivaled agronomic expertise, Dr. John F. Yanagida for his inexhaustible patience and wisdom in tutoring me with economics among other topics, Dr. Soojin Jun for his many years of encouragement and advice, and Dr. Andrew G. Hashimoto for his invaluable knowledge and for serving as one of my earliest academic mentors at UHM. I have had the distinct privilege of knowing many of you for a number of years, and cannot fully express in words the depth of my gratitude. Thank you to my amazing labmates and my academic family, for the wonderful times and shared experiences.
    [Show full text]
  • Draftfacilityplan 03 19 2021.Pdf
    City of Hailey, Idaho Woodside Water Reclamation Facility Planning Study Facility Plan Update Contents Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................................ 1 Planning Criteria .................................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Study Area Conditions ............................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Background ............................................................................................................................... 1 1.3 Planning Area ............................................................................................................................ 1 1.4 Land Use and Development ...................................................................................................... 2 1.5 Local Conditions ........................................................................................................................ 3 1.5.1 Climatic Conditions ....................................................................................................... 3 1.5.2 Socio-Economic Conditions ......................................................................................... 3 1.6 Environmental Impacts .............................................................................................................. 3 2 Wastewater Flows and Loads ............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Huber Report International
    HUBER Report News forICustnomers and tFriendseof HUBERrTECHNnOLOGY ationaSepl tember 2007 CONTENTS Removal of fat and grease with a HUBER HDF-10 EDITORAL Mechanical Treatment Solutions 2 Industrial Applications & Solutions 6 Solution for a Slaughterhouse in Norway Fat and grease from the slaughter - Sludge Treatment Solutions 10 house in Ringsaker caused severe Filtration & ReUse Solutions 12 problems in the municipal sewer sys - tem and wastewater treatment plant. HUBER International 15 A HUBER solution was selected for pre-treatment of the wastewater at the slaughterhouse. The wastewater is first screened and then treated in a dissolved air flotation process. Over 80 % of the particulate fat and grea - sed are removed without the need for IN BRIEF chemical pre-treatment. The remo - ved fatty flotate sludge has a solids Mechanical Treatment Solutions concentration of 6 to 8 %. Its volume Three self-cleaning Step Screens with is only 1 to 2 % of the wastewater 6 mm spacing were specified for the flow. The flotate sludge is hauled to a rendering facility. upgrade of the wastewater treatment With this newsletter we are sending you plant of Ayacucho, but the responsi - the first edition of our International ® ble officer of the regulatory authority Continuation on page 9 ROTAMAT RoS 3/3 for flotate sludge dewatering with flocculation reactor HUBER Report. This newsletter is inten - raised the following objections: there ded to keep you informed, on a regular was not a single self-cleaning screen basis (presumably twice a year), about in Peru; a Step Screen could not HUBER supports a private aid project recent developments of HUBER TECH - NOLOGY.
    [Show full text]
  • PDF File Generated From
    OCCASION This publication has been made available to the public on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the United Nations Industrial Development Organisation. DISCLAIMER This document has been produced without formal United Nations editing. The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this document do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO) concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries, or its economic system or degree of development. Designations such as “developed”, “industrialized” and “developing” are intended for statistical convenience and do not necessarily express a judgment about the stage reached by a particular country or area in the development process. Mention of firm names or commercial products does not constitute an endorsement by UNIDO. FAIR USE POLICY Any part of this publication may be quoted and referenced for educational and research purposes without additional permission from UNIDO. However, those who make use of quoting and referencing this publication are requested to follow the Fair Use Policy of giving due credit to UNIDO. CONTACT Please contact [email protected] for further information concerning UNIDO publications. For more information about UNIDO, please visit us at www.unido.org UNITED NATIONS INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATION Vienna International Centre, P.O. Box 300, 1400 Vienna, Austria Tel: (+43-1) 26026-0 · www.unido.org · [email protected] !C/~02 UNITED NATIONS INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATION CATALOGUE OF AGRICULTURAL AND FOOD TECHNOLOGIES Published by Industrial Ind Technological Information Bink of UNIDO In coopera don with Techno~ Exc:hanae, United Kingdom of Great Britain Ind Norttwn lrellnd Th1o; dor.umr.nt has not bnr.n r.d1lr.d Thr rlr.$1Qnal1on• f'mplcyrrl anrl !he prrsenlallon of maU!rial 1n th1~ docum1ml do no! imply the ••.:prn!;~1nn nt .u1y opinion wAlh~or.vr.r on thr.
    [Show full text]
  • Sewer Facilities Plan
    Sewer Facilities Plan Prepared for City of Yelm June 2016 Prepared by and Sewer Facilities Plan Prepared for City of Yelm Public Works Director 901 Rhoton Road Yelm, WA 98597 Prepared by Parametrix 1019 39th Avenue SE, Suite 100 Puyallup, WA 98374 T. 253.604.6600 F. 1.855.542.6353 www.parametrix.com and Redmond Town Center 7525 166th Avenue NE, Suite D-215 Redmond, WA 98052 T. 425.867.1802 x230 June 2016 │ 216-1781-033 CITATION Parametrix. 2016. Sewer Facilities Plan. Prepared by Parametrix, Puyallup, Washington. June 2016. Sewer Facilities Plan City of Yelm TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................... ES-1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................ ES-1 PLANNING AREA CHARACTERISTICS ................................................................. ES-2 FLOWS AND LOADS FROM THE EXISTING COLLECTION SYSTEM .............. ES-8 REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS ............................................................................ ES-9 CONDITION AND CAPACITY ASSESSMENT ..................................................... ES-10 LIQUID STREAM TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION ................................................................................................. ES-14 SOLIDS STREAM TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION ................................................................................................. ES-16 PREFERRED ALTERNATIVES ..............................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Emerging Technologies for Wastewater Treatment and In-Plant Wet Weather Management
    Emerging Technologies for Wastewater Treatment and In-Plant Wet Weather Management Prepared for: Office of Wastewater Management U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Washington, D.C. EPA 832-R-12-011 Under Contract EP-C-11-009 Prepared by: Tetra Tech, Inc. Fairfax, Virginia March 2013 Emerging Technologies March 2013 Emerging Technologies for Wastewater Treatment and In-Plant Wet Weather Management EPA 832-R-12-011 March 2013 Produced under U.S. EPA Contract No. EP-C-11-009 U.S. EPA Project Manager / Leader: Jacqueline Rose, Office of Wastewater Management Prepared by the Tetra Tech Corporation, Fairfax, Virginia Tetra Tech Project Managers: Greg Mallon and Sean Scuras Guidance was contributed by the following panel of EPA, academia, and industry experts: Bob Bastian, Richard Field, Lauren Fillmore, April Gu, David Kinnear, Nancy Love, Jim McQuarrie, Dan Murray, Sudhir Murthy, Amit Pramanick, Eliot Sherman, David Stensel, Rao Surampalli, Anthony Tafuri, Cindy Wallis-Lage, James Wheeler, and Phil Zahreddine. Technical Review was provided by professionals with experience in wastewater treatment. Technical reviewers of this document were: Charles Bott, Chief of Special Projects, Hampton Roads Sanitation District, Virginia Beach, Virginia Glen Daigger, Chief Wastewater Process Engineer, CH2MHill, Englewood, Colorado Tyler Richards, Deputy Director of Engineering and Technical Services, Gwinnnett County Water Resources, Gwinnett County, Georgia Electronic copies of this report can be downloaded from the U.S. EPA Office of Wastewater Management web site at: http://water.epa.gov/scitech/wastetech/publications.cfm Cover photos, top to bottom: Butler Drive Water Reclamation Facility, Peoria, AZ (Arizona Water Infrastructure Finance Authority) Orange County Water District, Groundwater Replenishment, CA (Tetra Tech) Ypsilanti Community Utilities Authority Biosolids Incineration System, MI (Tetra Tech) Richardson Treatment Plant, sampling influent water, Loma Linda, CA (Tetra Tech) Background photo: James E.
    [Show full text]
  • “D4.2B – Further Market Analysis”
    Eco-friendly and energy efficient sewage SLUDGE dewaTeRing through novEl nanomAterials and elecTro-osmotic process Project number: 611593 Duration: 48 months Start date of project: 01/09/2014 “D4.2b – Further Market Analysis” WP n°2; Requirements definition and lab-scale studies WP leader: AIN Planned delivery date: October 2018 Actual delivery date: October 2018 Reporting Period: RP2 Deliverable Responsible: AIN Contribution of the following organisations and people: Association of Navarra Industry, Surface Engineering Department: Cristina Díaz, Gonzalo García X2 Solutions: Vittorio Bosi, Emanuele De Risio, Giuseppe Di Florio Politecnico di Milano, DICA – Environmental Section: Roberto Canziani, Simone Visigalli, Andrea Turolla Project Coordinator: Roberto Canziani Organisation name: Politecnico di Milano Dissemination Level PU Public x PP Restricted to other programme participants (including the Commission Services) RE Restricted to a group specified by the consortium (including the Commission Services) CO Confidential, only for members of the consortium (including the Commission Services) Project co-funded by the European Commission within the FP7 (2007–2013) Marie Curie Actions— Industry-Academia Partnerships and Pathways (IAPP) Call: FP7-PEOPLE-2013-IAPP D2.2b – Further Market Analysis Dissemination level: PU Table of Content Table of Content ................................................................................................................................................ 2 List of Figures ....................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]