managing the risk of embracing disruptive technology · 2018-04-04 · managing the risk of...

Managing the Risk of Embracing Disruptive

Technology Julian Sandino

PhD, PE, BCEE, IWA & WEF FellowMay 2016

2 2015_WWGST_General_PPT_Template_00.pptx

Wastewater management evolution through time

Water

Reclamation

& Biosolids

Management

2000

Basic

Sanitation

< 1900

Pollution

Control

And Sludge

Disposal

1950

?


The future of urban wastewater management

• Today’s projects must address

current challenges, but do so

anticipating tomorrows issues

• WERF Technology Roadmap

Workshop : Looking forward

40 years – water quality,

energy, community values

• 30 attendees from USA,

Canada, Europe, Singapore

3


WERF Workshop: “Visioning” thePlant of the Future

• What effluent/reuse quality

will be needed in 2040?

• What will be the common

treatment technologies?

• What will be the

community expectations?

• What research and

breakthroughs are needed

WWTPs truly sustainable?

Source: Timebandits.wordpress.com


Attributes of the envisioned plant of the future

• Highly stringent regulatory requirements

• Carbon neutral; energy self-sufficient

• Centralized and decentralized systems

• Fully automated, minimum human

operational interface

• Resource recovery center

– Water: Advance reuse (centralized plants for

potable; decentralized for non-potable)

– Mining of inorganics: P , N and S

– Energy: biosolids, hydroelectric, thermal


Wastewater management evolution through time?

Water

Reclamation

& Biosolids

Management

2000

Basic

Sanitation

< 1900

Pollution

Control

And Sludge

Disposal

1950

Resource

Recovery

from

“Used”

Water

7 2015_WWGST_General_PPT_Template_00.pptx 7

Scenario planning: How do we get from Now to an uncertain Then

WRRFs FutureA. Restrictive Regulations

B. Sustainability Embraced

C. Engaged Stakeholders

Technology

Pathways

Optimized

Liquid Process

Energy self-

sufficient

Resources

recovered

Minimal solids

for disposal

Technology Attributes


0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

10.0

1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 2000 2100

Year

Popula

tion, B

illio

n

2050: ~ 9 Billion, 70% urban;

constrained resources, changed climate

1950: ~2 Billion, 70% rural,

ample resources, predictable climate

Technological approaches from the past unlikely to meet future water cycle needs�.


Disruptive Technology: doing things very differently?

• Wikipedia

• Cell phones

• Mobile internet

• Internet of things

• Cloud

• Autonomous vehicles

• 3D printing

• Renewable energy

• ?..


?but isn’t adopting “unproven” technologies risky?

• Risk is unavoidable in facing an

uncertain future? but it can be

managed

• There is an inherent risk betting

that “yesterdays” technology

pathways will also apply for

“tomorrows” undefined challenges

• Adopt a staged implementation

strategy, based on incremental

“no regrets” steps and frequent

reassessment

11 2015_WWGST_OAQM_PPT_Template_03.pptx

Case Study, VCS Denmark


VandCenter Syd (VCS)

• Established in 1853 as first

modern waterworks in

Denmark

• 3rd largest water and

wastewater company,

Headquartered in Odense.

• Operates 7 WTPs and 8

WWTPs with 2,125 miles

(3,400 km) of conveyance


Ejby Mølle WWTP

• 385,000 PE BNR facility

• 76% energy self-sufficient in 2011


Ejby Mølle WWTP

HeadworksPrimary

Clarifiers

Secondary Treatment

Trickling Filters

Filtration

WAS Thickening

Anaerobic

Digestion

Dewatering

Energy

Generation


Ejby Mølle WWTP energy optimization project: achieving energy self-sufficiency primarily through collaborative process optimization

• Contribute towards achieving VCS’s

corporate goal of energy self-sufficiency

and carbon neutrality by 2014.

• Involve staff at all levels in defining and

implementing recommendations

• Identify energy optimization opportunities

(EOOs): concentrate on short-term,

readily implementable scenarios to

reduce consumption and/or increase

generation, decreasing GHG emissions

• Identify and document all options,

including longer term opportunities for

positive net energy status for future

consideration


Availability of detailed historic energy consumption and generation data was key in the evaluation of optimization opportunities

Screen, Grit, and Grease

3.88%Primary Treatment

3.09%Pumping to

Trickling Filters

2.15%

Pumping to Activated

Sludge

5.80%

Trickling Filters -

Stage 2 pumping

7.30% Trickling Filters -

Recirculation pumping

4.73%

Trickling Filters -

WAS/Humus Pumping

0.01%

Trickling Filters - Return

Pumping to Act Sludge

0.64%

Activated Sludge -

Anaerobic Zone Mixers

1.78%Activated Sludge -

Oxidation Ditch Aeration

39.35%

Activated Sludge -

Oxidation Ditch Mixing

2.09%

Activated Sludge -

RAS Pumping

0.86%

Activated Sludge -

WAS Pumping

0.22%

Activated Sludge

- Other

0.24%

Effluent Filters

10.43%

Sludge Storage

1.56%

Anaerobic Digestion

3.83%

Thickening/Dewatering

Centrifuges

6.44% Other

5.59%

Ejby Mølle WWTP 2011 Annual Average Electricity Consumption


A whole plant mass/energy model and screening criteria lead to an EOO short-list

• Adopted screening criteria

– Readily implementable; Primarily

process modifications

– Significant impact on energy

profile; Proven elsewhere

• Short-listed EOOs

– Implement chemical enhanced

primary treatment (CEPT)

– Operate at shorter BNR system

solids retention time (SRT)

– Decommission TFs and convert

TF clarifiers to CEPT for wet

weather treatment

– Reduce effluent filtration operation

to 12 hours per day

• Longer term Improvements for

positive net energy status

– Co-digestion of high strength waste

– Implement deammonification for N removal in sidestreams by with mainstream later

– Replace oxidation ditch mechanical aerators with fine bubble diffused aeration


Model identified path to energy neutrality and beyond?.

75% 80% 85% 90% 95% 100%105%110%115%120%

Existing Condition (Baseline)

No Trickling Filters

Lower Bioreactor Sludge Age

Partial Effluent Filtration

Chemically Enhanced Primary Treatment

All Operational EOOs

All Operational EOOs + Anammox + Diffusers

Energy Produced 2011 Additional Energy Produced

En

erg

y S

elf-S

ufficie

ncy


Implementation of several EOOs achieved energy self- sufficiency by the end of 2013

-

5,000,000

10,000,000

15,000,000

20,000,000

25,000,000

200

9

201

0

201

1

201

2

201

3

201

4

kWh/year

Production

Usage

-

1,000,000

2,000,000

3,000,000

4,000,000

5,000,000

6,000,000

7,000,000

8,000,000

9,000,000

200

9

201

0

201

1

201

2

201

3

201

4

kWh/year

Production

Usage

Electrical

Energy

Electrical +

Heat Energy


Key to energy surplus: adopting deammonification as a disruptive technology

• Deammonification:

– Two-step, biologically mediated

conversion of ammonia to nitrogen gas

– Partial nitritation + anammox

• Nitritation: NH4 + O2 � NO2

• Anammox:

– Catabolic / Energy Reaction: NH4

+ + NO2- � N2 + 2 H2O

– Anabolism / Growth Reaction: NH4

+ + CO2 � biomass + NO3-


Background on Deammonification

1 mol Ammonia

(NH3/ NH4 +)

1 mol Nitrite(NO2

- )

1 mol Nitrate(NO3

- )

38% O2

1 mol Nitrite(NO2

- )

½ mol Nitrogen Gas(N2 )

25% O2

60% Carbon

NITRIFICATIONAerobic , Autotrophic

40% Carbon

Anammox

bacteria

DENITRIFICATIONAnoxic, Heterotrophic


Where are the potential savings with deammonification?

• Aeration Energy for Ammonia Removal:

– ~ 60% lower than conventional

• Carbon Requirements for TN Removal:

– Not required: enables carbon redirection (energy and/or

bioP?)

• pH / Alkalinity:

– No supplemental alkalinity required

Now over 100 sidestream treatment systems

world-wide using deammonification technology


Deammonification provided sustainable sidestream N management

Mainstream

hydrocyclonesSidestream

deammonification reactors


Mainstream deammonification was easily added on

Dewatering

Centrate

Influent Primary

Clarifiers

WAS

Bioreactor (aerobic/anoxic)

Effluent

DEMON

Reactors

AOB Seed

Anammox

Seed

CEPTMainstream

hydrocyclones


Seeding of anammox granules and mainstream WAS cyclones improved MLSS settleability

WAS Cyclones Only With Anammox Seed

WAS Cyclone

Start-upDEMON™

Sidestream

Start-up

Anammox seeding from

DEMON™to mainstream

begins; and SRT is reduced


Managing risk while embracing disruptive technologies – summary thoughts

• Leadership must articulate a vision for the future – be bold!

• An empowered, motivated, and accountable staff must:

– take responsibility for tomorrow as well– legacy!

– be involved in planning and implementing – buy in!

• Current conditions must be fully understood – benchmark!

• Degree of optimization potential of existing solutions must be established- Tweak!

• Consider non-traditional approaches to bridge gaps – disrupt!

• Implement changes incrementally and reassess frequently – no regrets!

• Learn from others while sharing results – collaborate!

• Non-compliance is unacceptable, always have a Plan B – contingency!

Managing the Risk of Embracing Disruptive

Technology Julian Sandino

PhD, PE, BCEE, IWA & WEF FellowMay 2016

managing the risk of embracing disruptive technology · 2018-04-04 · managing the risk of...

Documents