4 Methane Production by Anaerobic Digestion of Wastewater and Solid Wastes
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Effect of High Cationic Flocculant on Anaerobic Digestion of Municipal Wastewater
University of Louisville ThinkIR: The University of Louisville's Institutional Repository Electronic Theses and Dissertations 5-2017 Effect of high cationic flocculant on anaerobic digestion of municipal wastewater. Prathap D. John University of Louisville Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.library.louisville.edu/etd Part of the Environmental Engineering Commons, and the Other Chemical Engineering Commons Recommended Citation John, Prathap D., "Effect of high cationic flocculant on anaerobic digestion of municipal wastewater." (2017). Electronic Theses and Dissertations. Paper 2815. https://doi.org/10.18297/etd/2815 This Master's Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by ThinkIR: The University of Louisville's Institutional Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ThinkIR: The University of Louisville's Institutional Repository. This title appears here courtesy of the author, who has retained all other copyrights. For more information, please contact [email protected]. EFFECT OF HIGH CATIONIC FLOCCULANT ON ANAEROBIC DIGESTION OF MUNICIPAL WASTEWATER By Prathap Daniel John B.S, University of Louisville, 2006 A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of the University of Louisville J.B. Speed School of Engineering as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Professional Degree MASTER OF ENGINEERING Department of Chemical Engineering March 2017 ii EFFECT OF HIGH CATIONIC FLOCCULANT ON ANAEROBIC DIGESTION OF MUNICIPAL WASTEWATER APPROVAL PAGE Submitted by: __________________________________ Prathap Daniel John A Thesis Approved On ____________________________________ (Date) by the Following Reading and Examination Committee: ___________________________________ Dr. R. Eric Berson, Thesis Director ___________________________________ Dr. James Watters ___________________________________ Dr. Thomas Rockaway ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank the Conn Center for Renewable Energy Research and my research advisor Dr. -
User’S Guide
United States Environmental Protection EPA-600/R-05/047 Agency May 2005 Landfill Gas Emissions Model (LandGEM) Version 3.02 User’s Guide EPA-600/R-05/047 May 2005 Landfill Gas Emissions Model (LandGEM) Version 3.02 User’s Guide by Amy Alexander, Clint Burklin, and Amanda Singleton Eastern Research Group Morrisville, NC Purchase Order No. 3C-R127-NALX Project Officer: Susan A. Thorneloe Office of Research and Development National Risk Management Research Laboratory Air Pollution Prevention and Control Division Research Triangle Park, NC 27711 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Research and Development Washington, DC 20460 Abstract The Landfill Gas Emissions Model (LandGEM) is an automated estimation tool with a Microsoft Excel interface that can be used to estimate emission rates for total landfill gas, methane, carbon dioxide, nonmethane organic compounds, and individual air pollutants from municipal solid waste landfills. This guide provides step-by-step guidance for using this software application, as well as an appendix containing background information on the technical basis of LandGEM. LandGEM can use either site-specific data to estimate emissions or default parameters if no site-specific data are available. The model contains two sets of default parameters, CAA defaults and inventory defaults. The CAA defaults are based on federal regulations for MSW landfills laid out by the Clean Air Act (CAA) and can be used for determining whether a landfill is subject to the control requirements of these regulations. The inventory defaults are based on emission factors in EPA’s Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors (AP-42) and can be used to generate emission estimates for use in emission inventories and air permits in the absence of site-specific test data. -
Anaerobic Digestion of Primary Sewage Effluent
Anaerobic Digestion of Primary Sewage Effluent Prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability Under Cooperative Agreement No. DE-EE0003507 Hawai‘i Energy Sustainability Program Subtask 3.4: Biomass Submitted by Hawai‘i Natural Energy Institute School of Ocean and Earth Science and Technology University of Hawai‘i September 2014 Acknowledgement: This material is based upon work supported by the United States Department of Energy under Cooperative Agreement Number DE-EE0003507. Disclaimer: This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference here in to any specific commercial product, process, or service by tradename, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. SUMMARY A hybrid system comprised an up-flow packed bed anaerobic reactor and a down-flow trickling-filter reactor connected in series was shown to effectively treat primary clarifier effluent. When a clarifier and sand filter were added to the system, the effluent water quality achieved values of BOD5 and TSS that were below the EPA’s water discharge limits of 30 mg/l and equivalent to highly efficient activated sludge systems. -
Landfill Gas to Energy Fact Sheet
Landfill Gas to Energy Project Fact Sheet Developers AC Landfill Energy, LLC (ACLE), a joint venture of DCO Energy and South Jersey Industries. Project Cost $3 million Funding Assistance • $513,000 grant from New Jersey Board of Public Utilities • $2 million low interest loan from New Jersey Economic Development Authority • $375,000 grant from the New Jersey Department of The landfill gas to energy plant began powering operations in March 2005 at the Environmental Protection Atlantic County Utilities Authority (ACUA) Howard “Fritz” Haneman Environmental Park located in Egg Harbor Township. Environmental Impacts Landfill gas is approximately 50 percent methane, a potent greenhouse gas. Landfill gas is also a source of smog and odor problems. By capturing and using landfill gas, air pollution is reduced and an otherwise wasted source of energy is used. When working at full capacity this project can handle approximately 1,200 cubic feet per minute of gas produced by the landfill. With two generators fully operational, the 3.5 megawatt system is capable of generating 27,000,000 kWhs/yr, enough to power 2,757 homes. Using landfill gas reduces the need to use more polluting forms of energy, such as coal and oil. Landfill gas is also the only type of renewable energy that directly reduces pollution to the atmosphere. Since landfill gas occurs naturally, the Atlantic County Utilities Authority is putting to use a fuel that occurs naturally by collecting it and converting it to energy. Landfill gas to energy projects generate electricity more than 90 percent of the time, 24 hours a day, seven days a week. -
Landfill and Wastewater Treatment RNG Chemical and Physical Profiling: Increasing the Database Set DOT Prj# 351 Contract Number: DTPH56-10-T-000006
FINAL REPORT GTI PROJECT NUMBER 21078 Landfill and Wastewater Treatment RNG Chemical and Physical Profiling: Increasing the Database Set DOT Prj# 351 Contract Number: DTPH56-10-T-000006 Reporting Period: Final Closeout Report Issued (Period Ending): August 15, 2011 Prepared For: Mr. Robert Smith U.S. Department of Transportation Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration Technical Manager Office of Pipeline Safety 919-238-4759 [email protected] Prepared By: GTI Project Team: Karen Crippen, Monica Ferrer, Xiangyang Zhu, Russell Bora, Alan Janos, Katherine Buzecky, Amanda Harmon, Dianne Joves, Jim Soldenwagner Kristine Wiley, Team Project Manager [email protected] 847-768-0910 Gas Technology Institute 1700 S. Mount Prospect Rd. Des Plaines, Illinois 60018 www.gastechnology.org Legal Notice This information was prepared by Gas Technology Institute (“GTI”) for DOT/PHMSA (Contract Number: DTPH56-10-T-000006. Neither GTI, the members of GTI, the Sponsor(s), nor any person acting on behalf of any of them: a. Makes any warranty or representation, express or implied with respect to the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of the information contained in this report, or that the use of any information, apparatus, method, or process disclosed in this report may not infringe privately-owned rights. Inasmuch as this project is experimental in nature, the technical information, results, or conclusions cannot be predicted. Conclusions and analysis of results by GTI represent GTI's opinion based on inferences from measurements and empirical relationships, which inferences and assumptions are not infallible, and with respect to which competent specialists may differ. b. Assumes any liability with respect to the use of, or for any and all damages resulting from the use of, any information, apparatus, method, or process disclosed in this report; any other use of, or reliance on, this report by any third party is at the third party's sole risk. -
Landfill, Compost Or Incineration?
Waste management options to control greenhouse gas emissions – Landfill, compost or incineration? Paper for the ISWA Conference, Portugal, October 2009 by Barbara Hutton, Research student, Master of Sustainable Practice, RMIT University, Ed Horan, Program Director, Master of Sustainable Practice, RMIT University, Melbourne and Mark Norrish, Mathematics, Australian National University, Canberra (Australia) Executive summary Methane (CH4) is predicted to cause as much global warming as carbon dioxide (CO2) over the next 20 years. Traditionally the global warming potential (GWP) of methane has been measured over 100 years. The IPCC’s Fourth Assessment Report (IPCC 2007) warns that this under- estimates its immediate impact. Viewed over 20 years it has 72 times the GWP of CO2. The current study was prompted by concern about these emissions, and by a recent Government policy study in Melbourne, Australia, which recommended composting of municipal waste. Melbourne has not run out of landfill space, and has best-practice landfills with methane gas extraction. The mass composting of waste would reduce landfill gas, currently used as a fuel. Aim of the study This study uses recent information (2006 IPCC Guidelines) with local data to estimate: - How much greenhouse gas is emitted to the atmosphere from best practice landfill with methane capture pipes? How much can be captured to use as fuel? - Is aerobic composting or incineration better at controlling emissions than landfill with gas capture ? Method A spreadsheet was set up to compare emissions of methane, nitrous oxide and anthropogenic (man-made) carbon dioxide from compost, landfill and incineration, based on IPCC figures. The IPCC model allows for differences in temperature, humidity, dryness and aeration in the landfill, and different types of organic waste. -
Innovations to Market
September 2013 SPECIAL FOCUS Featured Session Bringing Innovations to Market. Page 4 Featured Session Energy Generation in Fort Worth. Page 6 Innovation Showcase A Highlight of WEFTEC Programming. Page 8 Pavilion Exhibitors InnovatIon Innovation-award winning companies. Page 16 Innovation Showcase Visualize the potential of the water sector Actionable Water Market Intelligence ™ ® BlueTech Research, an O2 Environmental company, is an intelligence service focused exclusively on identifying key opportunities and emerging trends in the global water industry. We are the premier source of actionable BlueTech® Research offers analyst directed water market intelligence for strategic advisory services, providing market business decisions on innovative intelligence, technology assessments and technologies and companies. strategic advice. ® Our clients use BlueTech Research for: BlueTech® Intelligence Briefings ents. Snappy and informative,with distilled details prepared by BlueTech® Research water • Identifying and assessing water industry experts. companies and technologies BlueTech® Innovation Tracker™ • Understanding new water Innovation Company Tracker tool to map and analyse water technology market opportunities technology companies. and identifying areas for growth ® • Analyzing water technology patent BlueTech Insight Reports trends and identifying water Detailed reports providing insight and analysis on key water technology market areas. technology licensing, investment and acquisition opportunities BlueTech® Webinars Technology and Market -
Waste Management
10 Waste Management Coordinating Lead Authors: Jean Bogner (USA) Lead Authors: Mohammed Abdelrafie Ahmed (Sudan), Cristobal Diaz (Cuba), Andre Faaij (The Netherlands), Qingxian Gao (China), Seiji Hashimoto (Japan), Katarina Mareckova (Slovakia), Riitta Pipatti (Finland), Tianzhu Zhang (China) Contributing Authors: Luis Diaz (USA), Peter Kjeldsen (Denmark), Suvi Monni (Finland) Review Editors: Robert Gregory (UK), R.T.M. Sutamihardja (Indonesia) This chapter should be cited as: Bogner, J., M. Abdelrafie Ahmed, C. Diaz, A. Faaij, Q. Gao, S. Hashimoto, K. Mareckova, R. Pipatti, T. Zhang, Waste Management, In Climate Change 2007: Mitigation. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [B. Metz, O.R. Davidson, P.R. Bosch, R. Dave, L.A. Meyer (eds)], Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA. Waste Management Chapter 10 Table of Contents Executive Summary ................................................. 587 10.5 Policies and measures: waste management and climate ....................................................... 607 10.1 Introduction .................................................... 588 10.5.1 Reducing landfill CH4 emissions .......................607 10.2 Status of the waste management sector ..... 591 10.5.2 Incineration and other thermal processes for waste-to-energy ...............................................608 10.2.1 Waste generation ............................................591 10.5.3 Waste minimization, re-use and -
Biogas Micro-Production from Human Organic Waste—A Research Proposal
sustainability Article Biogas Micro-Production from Human Organic Waste—A Research Proposal Alberto Regattieri * ID , Marco Bortolini ID , Emilio Ferrari, Mauro Gamberi and Francesco Piana Department of Industrial Engineering, Alma Mater Studiorum—University of Bologna, Viale del Risorgimento 2, Bologna 40136, Italy; [email protected] (M.B.); [email protected] (E.F.); [email protected] (M.G.); [email protected] (F.P.) * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +39-051-2093400 Received: 2 December 2017; Accepted: 24 January 2018; Published: 27 January 2018 Abstract: Organic waste (OW) management tackles the problem of sanitation and hygiene in developing countries and humanitarian camps where unmanaged waste often causes severe health problems and premature death. OW still has a usable energy content, allowing biogas production, potentially contributing to satisfy the local needs, e.g., cooking, lighting and heating. Digesters are the devices converting OW into biogas under anaerobic conditions. They are simple and effective solutions for the OW management in rural areas, humanitarian camps and remote developing regions, producing energy and fertilizers for local farming as residual. This paper describes the design and lab-test of a domestic OW management system integrating a waterless toilet with a small-scale digester producing safe biogas for local micro-consumption. Starting from people’s needs and an extensive review of the current state-of-art technology, the proposed system’s key innovation and strength is the combination of effectiveness and a very simple construction, set up and use, fitting with the rural conditions and raw materials available within the emerging countries. A small-scale prototype is assembled and lab-tested assessing the quantity—i.e., productivity—and quality—i.e., composition and methane content—of the produced biogas. -
Landfills Are Bad, but Incinerators (With Ash Landfilling) Are Worse
Landfills are bad, but incinerators (with ash landfilling) are worse Incinerators do not avoid landfills. For every 100 tons of trash burned, 30 tons become toxic ash that goes to landfills. The other 70 tons don’t turn into energy, but become air pollution. In terms of air pollution, and groundwater impacts, burning waste then burying ash is far worse than direct landfilling, and both are worse than a Zero Waste approach.1 A Zero Waste approach means zero incineration and at least 90% reduction from landfilling, with residuals biologically stabilized prior to landfilling, to minimize odors, leachate, gas formation and toxic migration. The most recent data comparing incinerators to landfills is from air emissions data provided by the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (DEP). For 2017, this includes data on all six trash incinerators in PA and 17 landfills in DEP’s southeast and southcentral regions. Incinerators are __ Pollutant (all data in tons) Incinerators Landfills times as polluting Greenhouse Gases (CO2e) 482,770 268,763 1.8 Total Health Damaging Pollution 1,975 1,236 1.6 Carbon Monoxide (CO) 119 22 5 Hydrochloric Acid (HCl) 17 1 21 Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) 625 6 105 Particulate Matter, Condensable 25 1 17 Particulate Matter (PM10) 26 17 1.6 Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) 17 4 5 Sulfur Oxides (SOx) 55 3 19 Total Suspended Particulate (TSP) 2,178 2,486 0.88 Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) 3 9 0.34 This shows that incineration is 80% worse than landfills for the climate, and that other pollutants that directly harm human health are 60% worse from incineration. -
Overview of Anaerobic Digestion for Municipal Solid Waste
Global Methane Initiative Overview of Anaerobic Digestion for Municipal Solid Waste Updated: October 2016 1 About This Presentation . Introduces the process of anaerobic digestion (AD) for municipal solid waste (MSW) . Provides an overview of anaerobic digestion microbiology . Helps you understand how you might benefit from AD . Guides you through the key areas to consider when developing an AD project . Reviews the status of AD globally and provides selected case studies Using Bookmarks to Navigate This presentation contains bookmarks to help you navigate. Using the panel on the left, click the bookmark to jump to the slide. For Chrome users, the bookmarks can be viewed by clicking on the bookmark icon ( ) at the top right of the screen. 2 Global Methane Initiative GMI is a voluntary, multilateral partnership that aims to reduce global methane emissions and to advance the abatement, recovery and use of methane as a valuable clean energy source. OBJECTIVES BENEFITS . Reduce anthropogenic methane . Decline in methane concentrations emissions and advance the and methane utilization will result recovery and use of methane in: while: – Sustainability – Enhancing economic growth – Energy security – Promoting energy security – Health and safety – Improving local air quality – Profitability and public health. 3 GMI Partners . Grew from 14 to 42 Partner governments, plus the European Commission . Accounts for nearly 70% of global anthropogenic methane emissions 4 Main Menu 1. Introduction – what is AD and why should it interest me? Click here for an introduction to AD 2. Is AD suitable for me? Click here for more info about the potential for AD 3. Step-by-step guide Click here for detailed information about the key issues to consider when developing an AD project 4. -
Why Anaerobic Digestion? Anaerobic Digestion Occurs Naturally, in the Absence of Oxygen, As Bacteria Break Down Organic Materials and Produce Biogas
The Benefits of Anaerobic Digestion of Food Waste At Wastewater Treatment Facilities Why Anaerobic Digestion? Anaerobic digestion occurs naturally, in the absence of oxygen, as bacteria break down organic materials and produce biogas. The process reduces the amount of material and produces biogas, which can be used as an energy source. This technology is commonly used throughout the United States to break down sewage sludge at wastewater treatment facilities. In the past few years, there has been a movement to start adding food waste to anaerobic digesters already in place at wastewater treatment facilities. The anaerobic digestion of food waste has many benefits, including: • Climate Change Mitigation – Food waste in landfills generates methane, a potent greenhouse gas. Diverting food waste from landfills to wastewater treatment facilities allows for the capture of the methane, which can be used as an energy source. In addition to decreased methane emissions at landfills, there are greenhouse gas emissions reductions due to the energy offsets provided by using an on-site, renewable source of energy. • Economic Benefits – Wastewater treatment facilities can expect to see cost savings from incorporating food waste into anaerobic digesters. These include reduced energy costs due to production of on-site power and tipping fee for accepting the food waste. • Diversion Opportunities – Most municipalities are investing in ways to divert materials from landfills. This is usually due to reduced landfill space and/or recycling goals. Wastewater treatment facilities offer the opportunity to divert large amounts of food waste, one of the largest waste streams still going to landfills. Why Food Waste? Food waste is the second largest category of municipal solid waste (MSW) sent to landfills in the United States, accounting for approximately 18% of the waste stream.