High Quality Biosolids from Wastewater

New Jersey Water Environment AssociationJoint MABA NJWEA Biosolids Workship

May 11, 2017

WE&RF Research Project NTRY7R15Material Matters, Inc

Trudy Johnston, President

• Principal Investigator – Trudy Johnston, Material Matters

• CO-Principal Investigator – Chris Peot DCWater

– Pennsylvania State University

– Virginia Tech

– University of Maryland

– Kansas State

– DC Metropolitan COG

WERF Research Partners

Project Advisors

• Jim Smith, formally with USEPA National Risk Management Research Lab

• Yen-Chih Chen, PSU

• Ralph Eschborn, AECOM

Participating Utilities

• Tacoma WA

• Duluth MN

• Vancouver BC

• Columbus GA

• Madison WI

• DC Water

• Alexandria VA

• Australia/New Zealand

• Lower Allen PA

• Hershey PA

• Ocean County NJ

• Camden NJ

• Howard Co MD

• Orange Co. CA

• Chicago IL

Project Background

Then Now

Water Resource Recovery Facilities

• Water reclamation

• Energy recovery

• Biosolids products

National Priorities are Shifting

Wastewater Treatment Plants

• Wastewater treatment

• Inefficient

• Sewage disposal

Photo Credit: http://www.wftv.com/news/local/doh-determines-no-health-risks-to-residents-near-smelly-orange-county-landfill/464928267

• Incineration – 24.7 %

• Landfill cover – 41%

• Out of state Disposal – 10.6%

• Class A distribution – 12.1%

• Class B land application – 1.0%

• Out of state Beneficial Use – 10.62%

NJ Trending Differently

• Strong history of providing $$$ for biosolidsresearch

• NEW FOCUS - Building for the future – biosolids as a commodity – to market and use locally

• Define and develop standards for HQB….there are no standards for HQB

• Create products that are in demand• Utilities comfortable meeting min reg standards

Is 503 enough to go to the next level?

WE&RF Research Supports Biosolids

Research to Encourage Use of HQB

• Define HBQ

• Expand use of HQB nationally

• Create new products

• Demonstrate efficacy of HQB products

• Use HQB in urban and suburban settings

• Market to customers

• Use of Social Media

Project Objectives

Define high quality biosolids (HQB)

Document ability of HQB to meet customer needs

Develop a biosolids marketing guidance tool

Create a community of partners in HQB with social media

Task 1

Task 2

Task 3

Task 4

Nuisance Odor is a Challenge

Goal of Task 1 is to identify a surrogate parameter that will directly correlate to biosolids stability.

Treatment Technologies and Biosolids Products Represented

• 18 utilities from across the USA, Canada, and Australia representing a wide array of treatment technologies and biosolids processing methods

• Class A/EQ designation for 17 of 18 products

• Samples collected as “Customer Ready”

Digestion Technologies

Digestion Method Number

Anaerobic 13

Aerobic 2

Undigested 3

• Advanced digestion technologies represented:

– ATAD

– Cambi

– Flow-through thermophilic (CBFT)

– Pasteurization

– Chemical Oxidation

“Customer Ready” Biosolids Types

Biosolids Form (% Solids) Number

Cake products (<45%) 11

Blended products (<45 – 70%) 4

Thermally dried (>90%) 3

Dewatering / Drying Method Number

Belt / screw press 5

Centrifuge 10

Thermal drying 3

• Focus on Class A/EQ biosolids

• Acquire diverse samples from utilities

• Human odor assessment– PSU Odor Assessment Lab

• Attractiveness to house flies

• Conduct specialized analytical tests

Task 1 Research Approach

Frequency

Duration

What is a Nuisance Odor?

Frequency

Duration

Situation orSetting

Intensity

Character

Hedonic Tone

Odor Quality

10

WEAK

BARELY DETECTABLE0

Labeled magnitude scale (LMS) for odor intensity

(Adapted from Green et al., 1996).

20

MODERATE

80

70

60

VERY STRONG50

40

STRONG

30

Odor Intensity via LMS Method(Place a line through desired level using 2 pt increments provided.)

100 STRONGEST IMAGINABLE

90

10 Strongest

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1 Odorless

(Circle desired response.)

OIRS = ASTM E544-99 (2004) Odor

Intensity Referencing Scale Method

(max & min: 20,250 ppm & 0 ppm

butyl alcolhol in DI water)

Odor Intensity via

OIRS Method

Odor Quality

Modified Wastewater Wheel (Adapted from Burlingame et al., 2004)Circle appropriate descriptors and list codes above. Select up to 5 categoriesin decreasing order

with dominant descriptor first.

Odorless = 010

Phase 1 – LMS Odor Intensity Values

Phase 1 - DTFCO Odor Detection Thresholds

Correlation Investigations

• Response Variable: Odor Detection Threshold (DT)

• Predictor Parameters:

1. Routinely measured: %Solids, %TVS, %S, %Fe, %Al, %NH4-N

2. Project specific: Methionine content (MET), Respiratory activity (RA4)

3. Discrete: Age, Digestion, Dewatering method (e.g., 1=centrifuge; 2=belt press; 3=heat dryer)

Total Volatile Solids

Low TVS means low odors

Two products with identical TVS (63%) at odor level extremes

Total Iron Content

Same %TVS but very different Fe content

Some treatment processes diluteconstituent levels

Total S Content

One product with 7.2% Fe

Methionine Content(Methionine is an S-containing amino acid that degrades to form methyl

mercaptan, a powerful, unpleasant volatile compound.)

House fly attraction and larval

development in waste water

biosolids

Ludek Zurek

Department of Entomology

Kansas State University

Adults

Larvae

EggsPupae

Larval habitat

1 day5-7 days

7 days

House Fly Life Cycle

Materials and Methods

• Biosolid substrates from 8 different facilities• Control substrate – fresh dairy cattle manure

o 50 g of each substrate placed in sterile petri dish

• Two choice assays: biosolid x control: placed in a plastic cageo Plastic cage placed in a wind tunnel

• House flies (Musca domestica) from the laboratory colonyo 20 females ready to lay eggs selected and placed in each cage

for 24 hrs

• Eggs manually counted in each dish

House fly attraction: Oviposition (egg laying) assays

Cattle manure and two types of biosolids

from WWTF

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

D-01 D-18 E-04 E-10 F-03 F-07 G-19 G-20

% e

ggs

Sample ID

Manure Biosolid

Oviposition of house flies: Two-choice assay: Manure x Biosolid

Materials and Methods

• Biosolid substrates from 8 different facilities• Control substrate – fresh dairy cattle manure

o 50 g of each substrate placed in sterile petri dish• 20 freshly laid house fly eggs placed on each substrate• Petri dishes kept in plastic containers in an incubator until fly

pupation and adult emergence• Adult flies counted in each container

House fly development

D01 D18 C E04 E10 C F03 F07 C G1 G2 C

70 0 60 0 0 35 0 0 75 0 0 50

Development (%) of house flies from eggs to

adults in biosolids and cattle manure

Current conclusions

• Biosolid substrates D01, F03, and F07 are

more attractive to house fly females to lay

eggs than fresh dairy cattle manure

• Biosolid substrates D18, E04, G19, and G20

are not attractive to house flies at all.

• Only the biosolid substrate D01 can support

house fly development from eggs to adults

(70% fly emergence)

34

Thanks for

your attention!