6/7/2018 Energy Recovery from Domestic Wastewater Using Anaerobic Membrane Bioreactor Treatment Thursday, June 7, 2018 1:00‐2:00 pm ET How to Participate Today • Audio Modes • Listen using Mic & Speakers • Or, select “Use Telephone” and dial the conference (please remember long distance phone charges apply). • Submit your questions using the Questions pane. • A recording will be available for replay shortly after this web seminar. 1
6/7/2018 Today’s Moderator Christine Radke The Water Research Foundation Agenda 1:00 Welcome and Introductions 1:05 Overview of Anaerobic Membrane Bioreactors, Steven Skerlos and Lutgarde Raskin 1:15 Pilot Study Goals and Results, Tim Fairley 1:30 Biofilm‐Enhanced MBRs, Caroline VanSteendam 1:45 Questions and Answers 2:00 Adjourn 2
6/7/2018 E NERGY R ECOVERY FROM D OMESTIC W ASTEWATER U SING A NAEROBIC M EMBRANE B IOREACTOR T REATMENT Lut Raskin Adam Smith Steve Skerlos Tim Fairley Caroline Van Steendam Nishant Jalgaonkar Professor Environmental Eng. Environmental Eng. Professor Professor Mechanical Eng. USC Graduate Student Graduate Student Graduate Student (Ph.D. UM) Grants: WRF – U2R15 – Next Generation Anaerobic Membrane Bioreactor Development Utilizing 3D‐Printing NSF – CBET 1604069 – WRF: Biofilm‐Enhanced Anaerobic Membrane Bioreactor for Low Temperature Domestic Wastewater Treatment WRF – TIRR5C15 – Life Cycle Assessment and Analysis of Biofilm Enhanced Anaerobic Membrane Bioreactor WRF – ENER4R12 – Low Energy Alternatives for Activated Sludge – Advancing Anaerobic Membrane Bioreactor Research WRRF – 10‐06D – Anaerobic Membrane Bioreactors as the Core Technology for a Low Energy Treatment Scheme for Water Reuse NSF – CBET 1133793 – Low‐temperature Anaerobic Membrane Bioreactors for Sustainable Domestic Wastewater Treatment June 7, 2018 Wastewater is a resource of energy, water, nutrients, and other useful product Wastewater treatment plant Water resource recovery facility Energy recovery Water reuse Nutrient recovery Conversion of carbon to biogas Struvite (MgNH 4 PO 4 ) precipitation Production of other useful byproducts Hydroxyalkanoates (bioplastics), alginates 3
6/7/2018 Conventional domestic wastewater treatment Primary Aeration Secondary Disinfection Basin Clarification Clarification Accounts for 45‐60% of energy demand for treatment Produces Landfill Intensive land area requirement significant residuals Anaerobic Digestion Land Application Conventional domestic wastewater treatment with energy recovery Primary Aeration Secondary Disinfection Clarification Basin Clarification Cogeneration Landfill Biogas Anaerobic Digestion Land Application 4
6/7/2018 Can anaerobic treatment be implemented in mainstream wastewater treatment? Upflow Anaerobic Sludge Blanket (UASB) Challenges • Solids/liquid separation • Heating for optimal performance • Effluent quality Anaerobic membrane bioreactor (AnMBR) combines anaerobic treatment with membrane separation Membrane fouling Biogas sparging Membrane Permeate or Transmembrane Pressure (TMP) Effluent ` 5
6/7/2018 Anaerobic membrane bioreactor (AnMBR) is an emerging approach to energy recovery from wastewater No aeration – low energy Biogas AnMBR Cogeneration Produces minimal Landfill residuals Biogas Smaller footprint Land Application Smith, A.L., L. B. Stadler, N.G. Love, S. J. Skerlos, and L. Raskin , 2012, Perspectives on Anaerobic Membrane Bioreactor Treatment of Domestic Wastewater: A Critical Review, Bioresource Technology , 122 , 149‐159. Bench‐scale study: AnMBR treatment of domestic wastewater at 15 ° C with submerged flat‐sheet microfiltration membranes Summary of results Psychrophilic Mesophilic Lagoon UASB Wastewater Permeate COD Permeate BOD 5 (mg/L) (mg/L) Mesophilic Synthetic 36 ± 21 18 digester Actual 76 ± 10 25 ± 3 275 days • Biogas sparging was effective at controlling long‐term fouling • Approximately half of methane generated was “lost” in permeate • Psychrotolerant, mesophilic populations dominated in AnMBR Smith, A.L., S.J. Skerlos, and L. Raskin , 2013. Psychrophilic anaerobic membrane bioreactor treatment of domestic wastewater. Water Research, 47, 1655‐1665. 6
6/7/2018 Additional questions need to be answered before AnMBR treatment of domestic wastewater will be implemented 1. Can treatment performance be improved? 2. Can operating temperature be lowered? 275 days 3. How does AnMBR compare to conventional treatment technologies based on cost, energy, and environmental impacts? Additional questions need to be answered before AnMBR treatment of domestic wastewater will be implemented 1. Can treatment performance be improved? 2. Can operating temperature be lowered? 275 days 3. How does AnMBR compare to conventional treatment technologies based on cost, energy, and environmental impacts? 7
6/7/2018 New bench‐scale AnMBR study to evaluate questions generated in initial study P1 P2 P3 • Three submerged flat‐sheet membranes • Biogas sparging for fouling control, independently controlled for each membrane • Operated initially at high sparging rate for fouling control • Psychrophilic temperature (15 o C) • Inoculated with mesophilic sludge only 1,000 cm 2 Smith, A.L., S.J. Skerlos, and L. Raskin , 2015. Membrane biofilm development improves COD removal in anaerobic membrane bioreactor wastewater treatment. Microbial Biotechnology , 8 , 883‐894. Poor permeate quality during first 100 days of operation Was limited fouling due to high biogas sparging related to poor performance? 700 700 600 600 Influent Influent 500 500 COD (mg/L) COD (mg/L) 400 400 Effluent Effluent 300 300 200 200 Acetate 100 100 Propionate 0 0 0 0 10 10 20 20 30 30 40 40 50 50 60 60 70 70 80 80 90 90 100 100 Days from Startup Days from Startup 8
6/7/2018 Poor membrane quality due to imbalance between reaction rates Complex polymers Hydrolytic and fermenting bacteria Monomers and oligomers Fermenting bacteria Volatile fatty acids and alcohols (Propionate) Syntrophs Syntrophic acetate oxidizers Acetate H 2 + CO 2 OR Acetogens Aceticlastic Hydrogenotrophic methanogens methanogens CH 4 + CO 2 Can we use biofilm treatment to improve permeate quality? Complex polymers Hydrolytic and fermenting bacteria Monomers and oligomers Fermenting bacteria Volatile fatty acids and alcohols (Propionate) Syntrophs Syntrophic acetate oxidizers Acetate H 2 + CO 2 OR Acetogens Aceticlastic Hydrogenotrophic methanogens methanogens CH 4 + CO 2 9
6/7/2018 Can we use biofilm treatment to improve permeate quality? Complex polymers Hydrolytic and fermenting bacteria Monomers and oligomers Acetate Fermenting bacteria Propionate CO 2 Volatile fatty acids and CH 4 Lovley, D. R., 2017, Syntrophy alcohols (Propionate) goes electric: direct e ‐ interspecies electron transfer. Annual review of Syntrophs microbiology , 71 , 643-664. Syntrophic acetate oxidizers Acetate H 2 + CO 2 Promote Acetogens Permeate Aceticlastic biofilm Hydrogenotrophic methanogens methanogens activity? CH 4 + CO 2 Different levels of biofilm development (fouling) on each membrane by varying biogas sparging 0 27 45 kPa kPa kPa 0% ~25% ~50% Biogas sparging reduction 10
6/7/2018 Biofilm promotion greatly improved permeate quality 200 No Fouling 180 160 140 Low Fouling 120 COD (mg/L) 100 80 High Fouling 60 40 20 0 100 105 110 115 120 125 130 135 Days from Startup Aceticlastic methanogens and propionate oxidizing bacteria developed over time in biofilm 80 Low Fouling 60 Acetate (mg/L) Bioreactor Medium Fouling 40 20 High Fouling 0 50 40 Propionate (mg/L) 30 20 10 0 100 105 110 115 120 125 130 135 Days from Startup 11
6/7/2018 Methanogenesis in the biofilm impacted the fate of methane Methane oversaturation = Dissolved methane measured in permeate / calculated equilibrium concentration 4.0 4.0 3.5 3.5 High Fouling 2.6 ± 0.30 3.0 3.0 Methane Oversaturation Methane Oversaturation 2.5 2.5 Medium Fouling 1.7 ± 0.44 2.0 2.0 1.5 1.5 1.0 1.0 Low Fouling Low Fouling 1.1 ± 0.22 1.1 ± 0.22 0.5 0.5 0.0 0.0 100 100 105 105 110 110 115 115 120 120 125 125 130 130 135 135 Days from Startup Days from Startup Greater methyl coenzyme M reductase ( mcrA ) gene expression in biofilm than in suspended biomass High Fouling Low Fouling No Fouling Bioreactor 12
6/7/2018 Additional questions need to be answered before AnMBR treatment of domestic wastewater will be implemented 1. Can treatment performance be improved? 2. Can operating temperature be lowered? 275 days 3. How does AnMBR compare to conventional treatment technologies based on cost, energy, and environmental impacts? Smith, A.L., S.J. Skerlos, and L. Raskin , 2015, Anaerobic membrane bioreactor treatment of domestic wastewater at psychrophilic temperatures ranging from 15°C to 3°C, Environmental Science: Water Research &Technology, 1 , 56‐64. Excellent AnMBR performance maintained down to 6°C 700 15 °c 12 °c 9 °c 600 6 °c 3 °c Influent 500 COD (mg/L) 400 300 200 100 0 152 172 192 212 232 252 272 292 Days from Startup 13
Recommend
More recommend
