Newsletter - May 2000

ARTICLES OF INTEREST FROM THE LAST ISSUE


Hamilton hosts another successful
WEAO Conference

The annual WEAO conference held at the Hamilton Convention Centre, April 16-18, attracted some 700 participants, with the Operations Challenge providing excitement and entertainment to liven up the serious technical papers. Technical sessions covered biosolids, nutrient control, sewer use programs, disinfection, and the industrial perspectives on sewer use. Conference Chair David Hein, UMA, controlled speakers and events with the skill of an orchestra conductor.

The keynote speaker was Marq de Villiers, renowned author, teacher and journalist, who outlined the appalling condition of water resources on a global basis. While we enjoy abundant freshwater along with the technical abilities to treat and transport it to consumers, many Third World Countries spend hours every day simply to access water of very poor quality. He gave one example of a dead camel being found in a well in an advanced state of putrefaction. People were drawing water from the well quite close to the dead camel. Why didn't anyone move the carcass? Well, no one knew who the owner was and in that part of the world, no one would take it upon themselves to move other people's property.

At the Monday awards luncheon, Toby Barrett, Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister of the Environment, praised the tremendous accomplishments in the past year by some outstanding leaders and volunteers. "Today's awards are important, because the Water Environment Association of Ontario is the province's most distinguished organization of technical and professional people in this field," he said. "In recent years, we've started to see some hard evidence that the Ministry's actions and your work is paying off. In Hamilton Harbour, for example, people are once again swimming at the beaches in the western harbour. The beaches in Toronto and other communities along the Great Lakes are staying open for longer periods each year, thanks to better stormwater management and other improvements.

"Over the years, we've worked with hundreds of industries to reduce the toxic chemicals being discharged into the environment. We've also worked closely with our municipal partners to promote healthier communities, by addressing local water and sewage treatment problems. Over the past two years, for example, Ontario invested some $200 million in improving water quality through the Provincial Water Protection Fund. That money has helped dozens of communities upgrade their sewage treatment infrastructure, and ensure clean drinking water for their residents.

"Of course, we still face a number of important challenges in protecting and enhancing Ontario's water resources, and we will need:

  1. Solid information and scientific expertise to give us a thorough understanding of the complex issues we face.
  2. New technology and technical know-how, along with a spirit of cooperation and innovation, so we can design the most effective solutions.
  3. Perhaps most importantly, we will continue to need effective partnerships ­ and a broad commitment to achieving the environmental goals we all share."

The Vice President of the Water Environment Federation, Joe Stowe, Jr., presented an overview of Federation activities, noting ruefully that bottled water is sold for as much as 500 times more than the cost of municipal drinking water supplied right inside the house. "It is clear we are not doing a good job of selling the benefits of environmental engineering properly." He also noted, approvingly, the rapid advance of female engineers into the environmental engineering profession.

Report by Tom Davey

Back to Archive


Phosphorus removal workshop well received

The Professional Wastewater Operators, PWO, presented a very successful phosphorus removal workshop at the Hamilton Convention Centre, on Monday, April 17. Held in conjunction with the WEAO Technical Symposium, the workshop, Everything You Must Know For Optimizing Total Phosphorus Removal from Municipal Sewage Effluent, was presented to a packed house.

The individual travelling the greatest distance to attend the workshop was Senthi Nathan. Senthi operates three BNR facilities for Cabwater in Queensland, Australia. It is interesting to note that Senthi attended university lectures presented by one of the workshop speakers, Mano Manoharan, twenty-two years ago. The two have promised to get together in another twenty-two years.

The workshop was designed to provide a comprehensive examination of phosphorus removal, drawing upon the extensive knowledge of recognized experts in municipal wastewater treatment and nutrient removal. Five one-hour modules were presented. A great amount of valuable information was imparted to an eager group of individuals who actively participated throughout the day. The workshop ended with a discussion about the safe handling of pickle liquor and a tour of the Burlington Stelwire Ltd. facility, the source of pickle liquor for the City of Hamilton/Region of Hamilton-Wentworth wastewater plants.

Steve Black, CH2M Gore and Storrie Limited, presented the first paper of the session, Why it is important to remove phosphorus in municipal sewage effluent. Steve's paper served as an excellent launching point for the day's proceedings. A number of topics were discussed, including: definition of phosphorus, environmental effects of excessive phosphorus addition to watercourses, sources of phosphorus to receiving waters, phosphorus control methods, and a review of successes with respect to phosphorus control.

Steve commented that during the past twenty years, the various nutrient control programs undertaken by the Canadian, Ontario and US governments have had great impact on Great Lakes and inland water courses and water bodies. Between 1972 and 1985, phosphorus loading to Lake Erie from Ontario municipal sewage treatment plants were reduced from an estimated 1,390 tonnes per year to 273 tonnes per year in 1985 ­ a reduction of 80%. Loadings to Lake Ontario were similarly reduced from 5,110 tonnes per year to 938 tonnes per year ­ a reduction of approximately 82%.

Our second speaker of the day, Tom Alkema, CH2M Gore and Storrie Limited, provided an overview of phosphorus removal mechanisms (with focus on chemical removal). Tom's relaxed speaking style and extensive practical knowledge encouraged active participation. The paper reviewed the major steps in chemical P removal, focusing upon reactions with alum, ferric iron, and ferrous iron. Many were interested in Tom's discussion of metal reactions with PO4 and his explanation of how waste sludge from water treatment plants (as long as it is rich in metal-hydroxide) can act as a source of available metal (usually Al) for P precipitation.

Tom ended his session with a discussion on the need for accurate phosphorus analyses, summarizing his belief with the following statement: "One 'true-ism' I have learned to appreciate over the years is that 'we cannot control what we cannot measure' or quantify. It is certainly true for P-removal; we simply cannot operate a P-removal system well without reliable information about TP, SP, and SS in various streams. Good quality sampling and analyses are essential."

Jim Matthews, Comprehensive Process Optimization Inc., presented the third paper of the session. This paper, Achieving monthly average limits of 0.3 to 0.5 mg/L TP concentration with secondary treatment, reviewed the approach, background, key activities, results and lessons learned for two conventional activated sludge plants, which have achieved 0.3 mg/L TP in the secondary effluent.

The two plants studied both discharge into sensitive receiving waters. The Department of National Defence, 8 Wing Trenton facility discharges into the Bay of Quinte. The Burlington Skyway wastewater treatment plant, Region of Halton, discharges into Hamilton Harbour. Both receiving waters have been designated Areas of Concern by the International Joint Commission because of impaired water quality.

Jim's paper demonstrated how, by addressing operational, administrative, design and maintenance issues in a prioritized manner, both plants achieved 0.3 mg/L TP without major plant upgrades. The paper also discussed the technical and non-technical issues that had to be addressed by staff in both organizations to identify and prioritize plant needs to maintain effluent quality.

The fourth paper of the day was presented by Stephen Nutt, XCG Consultants Ltd. Stephen's paper, An overview of process design/operation for achieving ultra-low TP effluent limits (0.1 to 0.2 mg/L), reviewed key findings of the report: Research, Development and Demonstration of Cost-Effective Tertiary Treatment Processes To Achieve Low Phosphorus Levels in Municipal WWTP Effluents, XCG Consultants Ltd., January 15, 1996.

The study was initiated in 1994, in response to a 1991 review (A Review of Approaches to Achieve Low Effluent Phosphorus Concentrations, Nutt, S.G., Wat. Poll. Res. J. Canada, 26(4), 1991) of approaches to achieve low effluent phosphorus concentrations (<0.10 mg/L) in municipal wastewater treatment plants that indicated there was little full-scale experience in operating facilities at these low effluent TP concentrations.

The study included:

  • A full-scale program to investigate post-precipitation (i.e. chemical addition to secondary effluent before filtration) as a feasible means of achieving low effluent phosphorus concentrations: and,
  • A pilot-scale program to examine alternative tertiary processes and process configurations.

Stephen's paper reviewed the key findings of the full-scale demonstrations and of the pilot-scale investigation of alternative tertiary processes and process configurations. Operational and cost implications were emphasized.

Dr. Mano Manoharan, MOE Standards Development Branch, presented an overview of biological nutrient removal processes, dealing primarily with the biological removal of phosphorus. Mano's enthusiastic presentation style provided the perfect learning environment for a group of individuals recently returned from an excellent lunch.

Topics discussed included: phosphorus as the limiting nutrient, removal of phosphorus from wastewater discharges, biological excess phosphorus removal, a simplified biochemical model, a review of some nutrient removal processes, a comparison of chemical vs biological phosphorus removal, and a discussion of the public acceptance of the bio-P process.

Advantages and disadvantages of biological phosphorus removal as compared to chemical precipitation were considered.

Advantages

  • no (or reduced) chemicals or dosage control needed
  • reduced sludge production
  • reduced metal concentrations in effluent and sludge
  • high phosphorus content in sludge increases its fertilizer value
  • improved sludge settleability and dewatering characteristics
  • reduced oxygen requirements
  • reduced process alkalinity requirements
  • increased oxygen transfer efficiency in aeration basin
  • reduced effluent nitrogen concentration.

Disadvantages

  • effluent filters may be necessary to achieve very low phosphorus concentrations (since effluent solids would have higher phosphorus concentrations)
  • phosphorus release may occur in anaerobic digesters and get transferred back to the head of the treatment plant via solids processing recycles
  • foaming
  • need for skilled operation
  • need for more monitoring

The Professional Wastewater Operators, Ontario gratefully acknowledge the workshop sponsorship provided by Eaglebrook Inc. of Canada.

Special thanks to the speakers who presented a great deal of information in a very interesting fashion, thereby ensuring the active participation of all in attendance and guaranteeing a successful workshop.

Thanks to Gerald Delvecchio and Neil Boden, Stelwire Ltd., for providing the group with an interesting overview of the Stelwire production process and arranging the site tour of the Burlington Stelwire facility.

Phosphorus removal workshop proceedings are included in the WEAO Technical Symposium proceedings, available in CD ROM format. Contact Francesca Davino, at the WEAO office, for more information.

Phosphorus removal workshop proceedings in hard copy format are available, for a nominal charge. Contact John Thompson, Tel: (416) 392-5172, for more information.

John Thompson, City of Toronto

Back to Archive


Biosolids News ­ Spring 2000 Update

The WEAO, in cooperation with the Canadian Water and Wastewater Association, the Western Canada Water and Wastewater Association and the British Columbia Water and Waste Association, are organizing the First Canadian National Residuals and Biosolids Management Conference - Biosolids 2000. The Conference, scheduled for Toronto, September 24-26, will discuss the future of organics residuals management in Canada. Sponsors of the conference include Environment Canada, the Ontario Ministry of the Environment, and the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs.

A three day Technical Program has been developed, featuring four parallel sessions with 60 papers. The benefits of forming a National Residuals and Biosolids Committee to represent the industry and promote a unified set of principles and standards will be discussed.

For more information on Biosolids 2000, contact the conference chair, Peter Nicol, at: (416) 499-0090, ext. 247 or E-mail: pnicol@ch2m.com, or contact the WEAO Office at E-mail: weao@weao.org.

WEAO Biosolids Committee is soliciting comments
on the Biosolids Utilization Guidelines

Ontario's Guidelines for the Utilization of Biosolids and Other Wastes on Agricultural Land were last revised in 1996. Since that time, significant changes have occurred in the regulations and practices related to the beneficial use of biosolids. Many jurisdictions are promoting the use of Best Management Practices and Environmental Management Systems to ensure that biosolids land application programs are environmentally sound. Recent research initiatives have added considerable technical knowledge about the fate of contaminants and pathogens in biosolids that are land applied.

Because of changing biosolids utilization regulations and practices, the WEAO Biosolids Committee has taken up the task of reviewing the existing Ontario Guidelines to determine what changes, if any, should be made to update these guidelines. The Committee is soliciting comments and suggestions for possible changes to the Ontario Guidelines for the Utilization of Biosolids and Other Wastes on Agricultural Land from the WEAO membership.

Please submit any comments and suggestions for changes to the current guidelines directly to the WEAO office, clearly marked Guidelines on Biosolids Utilization, before July 31, 2000. Comments can be submitted by mail, fax or e-mail. The Committee will provide a summary in the November WEAO Newsletter, as well as offering the summary to the provincial governments for their consideration.

Biosolids have a high profile at the WEAO Technical Symposium

Attendance at the full day session on Biosolids at the WEAO Conference in Hamilton showed the interest in and importance of the topic to water environment professionals. In all, nine papers were presented dealing with policy issues, management practices and engineering approaches to biosolids treatment.

In the morning session, Peter Nicol (CH2M Gore & Storrie Ltd.) and Janice Patterson (OMAFRA) discussed the mandates and missions of the WEAO Biosolids Committee and the Biosolids Utilization Committee (BUC), respectively. Phil Sidhwa (Terratec Environmental Limited) provided an overview of land application management practices, with a focus on Best Management Practices as they are evolving in the industry. Don Hoekstra (Prism Resource Management Limited) followed up by presenting a model terms of reference that could be used by municipalities to assist in procuring biosolids application contractors that follow such practices so that land application programs are not jeopardized.

The afternoon session provided a more technical focus with discussions of new engineering approaches to biosolids handling and stabilization. Benson Leung (Region of Halton) described the Region of Halton's Biosolids Management Program and recent changes that the Region has made in the biosolids thickening and stabilization at its wastewater treatment plants. Volker Masemann (Earth Tech Canada Inc.) described the improvements that the City of Toronto are making at their Highland Creek Treatment Plant to provide more flexibility in their biosolids management program at the facility. Matthew Elliott (CH2M Gore & Storrie Ltd.) described the rationale for selection of rotary drum thickener technology at the Barrie WPCP. Brian Kent (Region of Durham) described the use of new polymer conditioning control systems at the Duffin Creek WPCP that have improved the operation and reduced the operating cost of the biosolids dewatering equipment. Stephen Nutt (XCG Consultants Ltd.) closed the session with an overview of five new biosolids stabilization technologies that have recently been installed in Ontario to improve the quality of the biosolids and reduce the costs of biosolids handling.

The content of these papers and the interest of the audience bode well for the Biosolids 2000 Conference in September!

Contributions are always welcome and should be directed to:
Stephen Nutt, E-mail: stephen@xcg.com or
JanicePatterson, E-mail: jpatters@omafra.gov.on.ca.

Back to Archive