The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About12.b. Receive update on Treatment Plant Applied Research Projects Page 1 of 24 Item 12.b. I Central Contra Costa Sanitary District February 1, 2018 TO: HONORABLE BOARD OF DIRECTORS FROM: DAN FROST, SENIOR ENGINEER REVIEWED BY: DANEA GEMMELL, PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION MANAGER JEAN-MARC PETIT, DIRECTOR OF ENGINEERING & TECHNICAL SERVICES ROGER S. BAILEY GENERAL MANAGER SUBJECT: RECEIVE UPDATE ON TREATMENT PLANT APPLIED RESEARCH PROJECTS Please see attached presentation. Strategic Plan Tie-In GOAL SIX. Embrace Technology, Innovation and Environmental Sustainability Strategy 3- Encourage the Review and Testing of Promising and Leading Technology ATTACHMENTS: 1. Treatment Plant Applied Research Update February 1, 2018 Regular Board Meeting Agenda Packet- Page 99 of 148 - rTREATMENT PLANT _ r PPLO - -'N ESEARCH UPDATE Dan Frost, Senior Engineer Planning & Applied Research Group February 01 , 2018 Board Meeting February , oard Met nn nPn q qr Pt- STRATEGIC PLAN GOAL SIX: EMBRACE TECHNOLOGY, INNOVATION , & ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY Strategy 3: Encourage the Review and Testing of Promising andLeading Technology - ➢ Reduce capital costs _ - ➢ Reduce operations costs ➢ Improve reliability & performance ta'Lopssa 5anrreryOr. ➢ Eliminate hazards & improve safety ;_ Costa ➢ Maximize use of existing infrastructure _ - STRATEGIC _ dI L PLAN FY 2016-18 RECENT/CURRENT APPLIED RESEARCH PROJECTS CENTRIFUGE PILOTS CONFIRMED BENEFITS OF MODERN TECHNOLOGY Status Completed in 2014 and 2015 R Budget $55,000 Purpose Evaluate performance of modern centrifuges (cost of new dewatering system is $15M+) Findings Modern centrifuges can achieve drier cake f g & higher capture • Drier cake may help significantly reduce ` furnace fuel demand (currently >$300,000/year) - • Reduced polymer usage may be achievable w/ new centrifuges • Lime reduction may be feasible but requires PWI1 i further evaluation Recommendations: Conduct lime reduction testing. Plan for drier cake with new centrifuges. ` LIME REDUCTION BENCH TEST AIMED AT REDUCING CHEMICAL USAGE Project ManageriPitin G, Status Completed in 2017 100% Lime Budget $19k Purpose Reduce chemical costs >$300k/ ear & 50% Lime p Y Reduce furnace loading 25% Lime Findings • Minimal impact on centrate metals • Minimal impact on dewaterability • Ash fusion temperature w/ or w/o lime is above furnace operating temperature Recommendation: Conduct phased full-scale testing 0% Lime after furnace upgrades (e.g. burner replacement). =_ LIME REDUCTION BENCH TEST CONFIRMED FULL-SCALE TESTING AS NEXT STEP 2,700 `=Y -0Bench-scale results .. 21500 . � ♦ . � . ` LL • 4 . - ..r *� 2,300 - c � • .0 r r ' - - a 2,100 1,900 — 2014 Andritz and GEA = Centrifuge Pilot Results 1,700 ' Furnace Max Operating Temperature = 1,600 F 1,500 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Lime Dose (% of Current Dose) ZEOLITE ANAMMOX PILOT PROVIDED VALUABLE INSIGHT INTO MAINSTREAM ANAMMOX CHALLENGES bproject Managers: Randy Schmidt/Rita Cheng Status Completed in 2015 Budget >$250,000 Purpose Proof of concept testing of Zeolite-Anammox for mainstream nutrient removal at Central San Findings Partial/Complete Nitrification was successfully achieved (ammonia -> nitrite -> nitrate) • Total Nitrogen Removal (nutrient removal) was not achieved f • Unable to establish mature anammox ti population (possible inhibition due to Iw ammonia:nitrite ratio and/or iron deficiency) - - Recommendations: Discontinue pilot. Track further development of technology to address anammox inhibition & stable total nitrogen removal. STRAINPRESS PILOT I PLASTICS IN SLUDGE Status Completed in 2015 - p - Budget $75,000 - Proof of concept testing of strainpress to Purpose remove plastics from sludge prior to - incineration & reduce HCl emissions Findings Minimal plastics in sludge screenings • No observed reduction in HCI emissions Recommendations: Do not install strainpress as part f of Headworks Project but continue with new influent / fine screen replacement. r - -- A 1 , 6. Wet Electrostatic Precipitator . ;, ;;� 5. Separator Tray Fy =i bpi WA 4. Venturi �_ �..�■■. ;; � 3. Condenser JL M_r f I ni •dpi 7. Mercury 2. Quench Sorbent Module l DISTRICT-WIDE COLLABORATION WAS ESSENTIAL Planning & Applied Research Plant Capital Projects Maintenance Plant Operations Laboratory Regulatory Compliance WET SCRUBBER PILOT SAVES OVER $ 13M FROM SOLIDS HANDLING PROJECT Project Manager: Nitin Goelm AM NIL Status Near Completion (Pending Final Reports) Budget $1M Purpose • Confirm >$30M of air pollution control equipment • Achieve reliable emissions compliance — current & future • Understand treatment impacts (incorporate into Project Design) Findings • Pilot met current limits for normal & bypass conditions • Wet electrostatic precipitator (WESP) & mercury modules not required now • Minimal impact on scrubber water metals Recommendations: Replace existing wet scrubber. WESP, mercury modules, & scrubber water treatment not required (>$13M Savings). WET SCRUBBER PILOT WAS A GREAT SUCCESS -- >50 Central San Staff Involved �r >2,000 Air & Liquid Samples Analyzed > 10 Contracts Managed £ '41 �E Zero Safety Incidents Project Budget $1M Savings >$13M . g SCRUBBER WATER TREATMENT BENCH TESTING SIMULTANEOUS WITH WET SCRUBBER PILOT Status Near Completion (Pending Final Report) Budget $25k Purpose Better understand treatment methods & costs if scrubber water treatment is required in the future (currently estimated at $2M) Findings • Sedimentation alone is effective • Coagulation (pH Adjustment) + Sedimentation can achieve low metals concentrations • Treatment performance varies by metal • With filtration, able to reduce turbidity from 275 NTU to <2 NTU Recommendations: If sidestream treatment required in the future, the bench test results can be used for technology selection & design. SCRUBBER WATER TREATMENT BENCH TESTING SUCCESSFULLY REDUCED METALS & TURBIDITY r = 10 4 ,.s Rapid Mix Slow Mix Settle . 45s 5 min 10 min i e 100% M 80% 1 I 60% 40% 20% 11 — Chromium Copper Mercury Nickel Selenium nda Packet- Page 113 0�'1I i pH-6.6 ■pH9.5 ■pH10 ■pH10.5 ■pH11 SECONDARY TREATMENT EVALUATION TO IDENTIFY OPTIMIZATION OPPORTUNITIES Project Manager: Nitin Goell Status In Progress ; Budget $50,000 Purpose Improve secondary treatment performance, reliability, & capacity Reduce or eliminate >$20M secondary clarifier expansion needs (if possible) J Updates • Secondary process training sessions • Microscopic analysis training • Ongoing sampling to identify specific = - plant conditions that impact secondary }st treatment performance f Next Steps • Continued sampling • Document findings into a technical memorandum (e.g. recommended process changes, optimization, sampling) HYPOWERS BIOENERGY PILOT Status Phase 1 (In Progress) — Validation/Pilot Planning & Design Phase 2 (-2019/20) — Construction & Operation of Pilot Budget Phase 1 Budget: $2.5M (% from Department of Energy (DOE), % from HYPOWERS Team) Central San in-kind contribution is for staff time only: N$34k to date ($0 Cash) Purpose 0 Explore feasibility of emerging hydrothermal bioenergy process Implement N4 dry ton per day pilot at Central San Updates 0 December 2016 - DOE selected HYPOWERS bioenergy project for grant June 2017 - Kickoff workshop at Central San October 2017 - Laboratory bench test/validation conducted & approved December 2017 - Bench test conducted on Central San sludge Next Steps 9 Pilot system planning/design/integration at Central San Prepare Pilot Design Package (cost estimates, project management plan, risk mitigation plan, life cycle analysis, techno-economic analysis, etc.) � 1 • � 1 • 1 1 � • � 1 • � r _ lies . „ � i•� '� � ��_ _ � _ - /fes/ IF M- 4 Oro to MEOW- .: Pacific Northwest National • • • Bench 1 wee :e • !•-••. '.•- I I q,ftf4 : J- R_ a_, SOLIDS HANDLING P3 DEMONSTRATION ' • • . Status In Progress y Budget TBD Purpose Demonstrate the use of fluidized bed � gasifier(s) for solids handling • Reduce future capital improvement costs II for new solids handling facilities Updates Ongoing coordination between staff and teams • Consultants supporting staff (CDMSmith, Ernst & Young, and Hawkins, Delafield, & Wood) Next • Complete evaluation of life cycle cost - Jim Steps proposals once received �, t • Select preferred team(s) to negotiate P3 " ra�� r agreement - - POTENTIAL APPLIED RESEARCH NUTRIENT REMOVAL PROJECTS NUTRIENT REMOVAL WOULD REQUIRE A SUBSTANTIAL INVESTMENT B A C W A BAY AREA Bay Monitoring : CLEAN WATER Studies AGENCIES Recycl- • Water '• tential Nutrient . • ing Level 1 Optimize nutrients (no exact limits) Level 2 2 15 1 Level 3 2 6 0.3 Nutrient Removal Upgrades Optimizations Draft BACWA Report Piloting — ➢ Optimization: >$10M+ Capital Cost ➢ Level 2: >$180M Capital Cost ➢ Level 3: >$250M Capital Cost NUTRIENT REMOVAL PILOTING IS ONE WAY TO BETTER PREPARE CENTRAL SAN R Simultaneous fill/draw j � Out j In Aerobic zonr •Binlogicrati moni.. an t„ .Amnm oxidation SECONDARY f• •Phosphate removal CLARIFIER +r t Anoxic/Anaerobic Zone: •NOx reduc[ian to Nrtmgen gas g Fast settling z Aeration .Phosphatere.—I NeredaO tF' FINE BUBBLE :•:;.•. \.(1e AERATION I 1.rycl l lA Es BIOREACTOR t ZEELUNG q;r r-ASSETTES AERATION BLOWER Membrane Aerated Bioreactors Aerobic Granular Sludge • Intensification Split Stream Bioaugmentation • Use Existing Tanks Only Construct New Granular Sludge Tanks • Possibly Avoid Relocating Convert Existing Tanks Contaminated Soils Reduce Lifecycle Costs • Reduce Lifecycle Costs Reduce Energy & Greenhouse Gases • Reduce Energy & Greenhouse Gases NUTRIENT REMOVAL PILOTING APPROACH Review & Current Step Screen Technologies � Pilot Test Protocol Pilot & Pilot Equipment/Rentals Preclesign Instrumentation Criteria Up to $1M Sampling & Lab Analyses Consultant Staff time LL Full-Scale Demo Implementation Several $M's QUESTIONS ?' °February 1, 201 g iloarodMeeting Agen - Pqni= 199 nf JAR