TCHOBANOGLOUS Et Al. 2003 Wastewater Engineering PDF
TCHOBANOGLOUS Et Al. 2003 Wastewater Engineering PDF
TCHOBANOGLOUS Et Al. 2003 Wastewater Engineering PDF
Wastewater Engineering
Treatment and Reuse
(Fourth Edition)
George Tchobanoglous
Franklin L. Burton
H. David Stensel
Wastewater Engineering:
An Overview
1-1
TERMINOL(X;Y 3
12
1-3
1-4
WASTEWATER CHARAOERISTICS 9
Improved Analyt1cal Techniques 10
Importance oF Improved vVastewater Characterization
1-5
10
WASTEWATER TREATMENT 10
Treatment Mefhods I I
Current Status 12
New Directions ond Concerns 15
Future Trends in Wastewot Treatment
20
16
1-7
20
22
REFERENCES 24
Every community produce" both liyuid and solid wastes and air emissions. The liquid
wastr-wastewater--i~ e~scntially
I Chapter 1
Figure 1-1
Schematic diogrom of a
waslewoter monogeme11t
infrastructure.
Domeslie
~ wastewater
cso
treatment
facility
OWF
/rreatment
facility
pathogenic microorgan i~ms that dwell in the human intestinal tract. Wastewater also
contains nutrient~, which can ~timulate the growth of aquatic plants, and may contain
toxic compound!! or compounds that potentially may be mutagenic or carcinogenic. For
these reasons, the immediate and nuisance-free removal of wastewater from its sources
of generation, followed by treatment, reuse, or dispersal into the environment is necessary to protect public health and the environment.
Wastewater engineering is that bmnch of environmental engineering in which the
basic principles of science and engineering are applied to solving the issues associated
with the treatment and reuse of wastewater. The ultimate goal of wastewater engineering
is the protection of publi<.: health in a manner commensurate with environm ental, economic, social, and political concerns. To protect public health and tbe environmem, it is
necessary to have knowledge uf (I) constituents of concern in wastewater, (2) impacts of
these constituent~ when wastewater is dispersed into the environment. (3) the transformation and 1ong-term fate of these constituents in treatment processes, (4) treatment
methods that can be used to remove or modify the constituents found in wastewater, and
(5) methods for beneficial usc or disposal of solids generated by lhe treatment systems.
provi?e an initi~l persp~ctive on the field of wa~:~tewater engineering, common
tenmnology lS first detmed followed by (I ) a discussion of the issues that need to be
addressed in the planning and de!.ign of wastewater management systems and (2) the
current status and new directions in wa~tewater engineering.
!o
1-1 TERMINOLOGY
ln the literature. and in governmental regulanons, a variety of terms have been used for
individual constituents of concern in wastewater. The tenninology userl commonly for
key concepts Ulld tenns in the field of wastewater management is summarized in Table
1- 1. In some cases. confusion and undue negative perceptions arise with the use of the
terms contdminants. impuriries, and pollutants, which are often used interchangeably. To
avoid confusion. the term cotlstiruent is used in thi~ text in place of these terms to refer to
an individual compound or clement, such as ammonia nitrogen. The term characteri.r;tic
is used to refer to a group of constituents, such a) physical or biological chamcteristic~.
The tenn <~sludge" has been u11ed for many years to signify the residuals produced
in wastewater treatment. (n 19<>4, the Water Environment Fedenu.ion adopted a policy
defining "biosolids.. as a prim;uily organic, solid wastewater treatment product that can
be recycled beneficially. Tn th is policy, "solids'' are defined as the residuals thar are
derived from the treatment of wastewater. Solid~ that have been treated to the poim at
which they are suimble for ben~ficia1 use are termed ''biosolids." In this text, the tenns
of solids and biosolids are used exten"iively, but "sludge" continues to be used. especially in cases where untreated solid material and chemical residuals are referenced.
I Chapter I
Table 1-1
Definition
Biosolids
P~imar.ily an organic: semisolid wast~~'Oter ptoduct that remains ofter solids ore stabilized
b.ol091cally or chemcolly ond ere sutoble for bene~cial use
Cla~s A biosolid~h
B1osolids in which t~e pathogen~ (induding entefic virv~~, pathogenic bacteria, ond viable
helminth ova) ore reduced below current detectable levels
Closs B bio)()lids11
Biosolids in which the pathogens are reduced to levels that are unlikely to pore o threat to
public health and the environment under specific use conditions. Closs 8 biosolids cannot be
sold or given away in bags or oth~ container$ or applied on lawns or home gardens
Chorocteri$tic!.
(wastewater)
Composition
Constituentsc
The makeup o{ wa5tewater, including the physical, chemical, and biological constituents
Contaminants
Disinfection
EfRuent
Impurities
Nonpoint source~
Sources of pollution thot originate from multiple sources over o relatively large areo
An element that is essential for the growth of plants and animals. Nutrients in wastewater,
usually nitrogen and phosphorus, may cause unwanted algol and plant growths in lakes and
Nutrient
and biochemical
streams
Po,.orne~r
Point sources
Pollvtional loads discharged at o speci~c kx:ohon from pi~$1 ot,~tfolls, and conveyance methods
from either municipal wastewater treatment plants or industrial WO$te treatment facilities
Pollutants
Reclamation
wastewater
Rccyding
Repurificotion
Revse
Sludge
Solids removed from wastewater during treo~nt. Solids 1hot are treated Further ore termed
biosolids
Solids
Material removed from wmtewater by 9ravity sepora~on !by darifiers, thickeners, and
lagoons) and ;s the solid residue from dewatering operations
t"ound in wastewater: and (.~ l th~ devdoprnent of national concern for the protection of
o~jectives
Therefore, treatment ohjectiH~~ 111u~t go hand in hand with the water quality objectives
or standards estahl ish~d by rh~ f~dcral. ~:t:.tLe, and regional regulatory authorities. Impor-
tant federal regulations that ha\c brought about changes in the planning and design of
wastewater trcatmt..nt taci liti-:" in Lhe l fnircd State~ are :-.ummari.led in Tuble 1- 2. It is
interesting to note that the. d ean :mace-. of I<no and 1990 have had a ~ignificant impact
on industrial and municipal \vao.,tt:wah:r programs, primarily through the implementation of treatment facilitie~ for rlh' control of ern1~~ion!>.
Table J-2
Summary of
significant U.S.
federal regulations
that affect
wastewater
management
Regulation
Description
(Sewage Sludge
Regulations)
attraction
11994)
40 CFRf>ort 60
Pur-;uant lu Section 304{d) of Publir Law 92-500 {see Table 1 -2). 1he U ~
ronmental Prott:clioo Agency (l:.s . EPA) publi~hed its detioinon o1 minunum '.
for secondary trcatmenl. Thi.~ ddinitiun, originally issued in 1973. wa~ ameno~ ..
t9R5 to allow additional flexihilJty rn applytng the percem removal requirement" of pdhuants to treatment facilities ~en ing ...cpara(\! sewer system~. The definition of sel:onJ- '
at) treatment is reported in Tabk l-3 and includes three major ~ftluem parameter~ . .)day HOD_ TSS. and pH. Tht: ~uh!:-litution of 5~day carbonaceous BOD <CROD..J fnr
BOD~ may be made at the option of the permitting authority. The.\e standurd<; pro\ ided
the b~si~ for the design and operation of most Lre.atment plants. Special interpretation~
of the detinifion of ~econuary treatment are pcrmttted for publicly owned treatm~nr
work~ ( 1) served hy combined sewer ~ystem\. (2) using waste stabilizuLion pond~ and
trickling tilter~. <3l receiving indu~trial flow!., or (4) receiving Jess concentrated mfluem wa-.tl!water frotn ":>eparatc ~ewer~. The ~econdary lreaunent regulalion\ ~ eH'
amended further in 1989 to darify the percent removal requirement!. during dry period~
for treatmcrtt facilitk~ sef\ed b) combined ~ewer~ .
In 1987, Congres~ enacted the Water Quality Act of ICJ87 <WQA). the fi r.,t maJm
revi..,ion of the Clean Water Act. Important provi~1on~ of the WQA were. {I l '>trcn~lll
erung federal 'Water qualit) regulations by providing change.-; in permining and adtling.
.<mbsrantial penallies for ~rmiT violat ion ~. {2) significantly amenrling thr CWA\ formal
sludge control program b) empha\17.i ng 1hc identification and regulation of toxic polllllant" in sludge. (3) providing funding for '>tate and U.S. EPA ~ludic~ for dc~fining nrmpoint and toxic source~) o: polluti<>n, (4) cslablishing ne'Y\ deadlines for compliantf'
including priorities and permit requircmenh for ~tormwater, and (51 a pha.;e-out of the
conc;rructiOil grants program as a mcrhod ot fmaoc.:ing publicly owned treatment worb
(POTW).
Table 1..-3
Average 30-cfay
~nt
con~'
BOD5
mg/l
3Qd
mg/ L
300
Charact8rillic of chchorge
Hydrogenion concentration
C80DsF
o
pH untts
mg/1
Awrote 7-doy
conceftlrafionC
45
45
25
40
stabilization ponds and tnc:kling hhers to hove higher 30-doy average concentrahons {45 mg/ l) and ? .
day overage concentrolions 165 mg/ l) of BOD/suspended solids perfofmance levels as long os the wafer quality of the
rece1vng water is not adversely affected. Exceptions are oiso permitted for combined sewer!>, certain mdustrial categorie!., ond
less concentrated wastewater from separate sewers. for precise requHemenl~ of exreplio1'1s, F&derof Register !1988) should br!
consulted.
lo be exceeded
d Averoge removal shall not be less than 85 percent.
t Not
Recent regulations thar affecT wastewater facilities design include those for the
treatment, di<.>posal. and beneficial use of biosolids (40 CFR Part 503). In the biosolids
regulation promulgated in \9<n _ natjonnl standards were set for pathogen and heav-y
metal coment and for the ~arc handling and use ofbiosohds. The standards are designed
to pmtect human health and the cnvironme11t where biosolids are applied beneficially
to land. The rule also promot~s the development of a ''clean sludge" (U.S. EPA, 1999).
The total maximum da il~ load {TMDL) program was promuJgated in 2000 but is
not scheduled to be in effect unti l 2.002. The TMDL rule is designed to protect ambient water quality. A TMDL represents the maximum amount of a pollutant thal a water
body can receive and sti ll meet water quality ~tandards. A TMDL is the sum of (I ) the
individual waste-load allocauon'i for point ~ources, (2) load allocations fur nonpoint
sources, (3) natural background levels, and (4) a margin of safety (U.S. EPA, 2000). To
implement the rule, a c;omprehcnsive watershcd-basc:d waLcr 4uaJity management program must be un<ienakcn to tind and control nonpoint sources in addition to conventional point source discharge-.... With implcmenlalioll of tht: TMDL rule, 1he focus on
water quality shifts from technology-based conrrols 10 preservatio11 of ambiem water
quality. The end rc~ulc it-; an inte~rated planning approa~h that transcends jurisdiclional
boundarie!-. and force~ different ~~ctors. .such as agriculture, water and wastewater utilities, and urhan runoff managl:'r~ to cooperate. lmplememalion of the TMOL rule will
vary depending on the -.pccilic v.ater quality objectives establh,hed for each watershed
and, in some cases. will require rhe installalton of advanced le\'els of treatment
H} he
potable water supplies. Significanl questions remain about the testing and levels of treatment necessary to protec[ human health where the corruningling of highly treaten waste
wa!.er with drinking water source~ result!. in indirect potable reuse. Some professionals
t Chc""'r 1
object in principle to the indirect reuse of treated wastewater for potable purposes; others exprc~s concern that cunent techniques are inadequate for detecting aU microbial
and chemical contaminants of health significance (Crook et al., 1999). Among the latter concern.~ are (I) the lad, of sufficient infonnation regarding the health risks posed
by some microbial pathogens and chemical constiruencs in wastewater, (2) the nature of
unknown or unidentified chemical constituents and potential pathogens, and (3) the
effectiveness of treatment processes for their removal. Defining risks to public health
ba.,ed on sound science is an ongoing challenge.
Because new and more sensitive methods for detecting chemicals are available and
methods have been developed that better detennine biological effects, constituents that
were undetected previously are oow of concern (see Fig. 1-2). Examples of such chemical constituents found in both .surface and groundwaters include: n-nitrosodimethylamine
(NDMA), n principal inbrreuient in rocket fuel, methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE). a
highly soluble gasoline additive, medically active substances including endocrine disruptors, pesticides, industriul chemicals, and phenolic compounds commonly found in
nonionic surfactants. Endoc1ine-disrupting chemicals are a special health concern as they
can mimic honnoncs produc~d in vertebrate animals by causing an exaggerated response,
or they can block the effects of a hormone on the body (Trussell, 2000). These chemicals
cal\ cause problems with development, behavior, and reproduction in a variety of species.
Increases in testicular, pronate. and brea~t cancers have been blamed on endocrinedisruptive chemicals (Rocfcr et al., 2000). Although treatment of these chemicals is not
currently a rnission of mun icipal wastewaer treatment, wastewater treatment facilities
may have tube designed to dcuJ with these chemicals in the future.
Other health concern~ relate lo: ( I) the release of volatile organic compounds
(VOCs) and toxic air (;OJJtaminants (TACs) from collection and treatment facilities,
(2) cblorine disinfection. and (3) disinfection byproducts (DBPs). Odors are one of the
most serious environmental ~.:uncems to the public. New techniques for odor measurement are used to quantify the development and movement of odors that may emanate
from wastewater fatiliric.s, and special efforts are being made to design facilities that
minimize che development uf odors, contain them effectively, and provide proper treat
ment for their destruction (see Fig. 1-3).
Figure 1-2
Atomic ad~tion
wastewa,.r treatment
plan~.
Many ind11.strial wastes contain VOCs that may be flammable, toxic, and odorous.
and may be contributors to photochemical smog and tropospheric ozone. Provisions of
the Clean Air Act and local air quality management regulations are directed toward
(1) minimizing VOC releases at the source, (2) containing wastewater and their VOC
emissions (i.e., by adding enclosures). treating wastewater for VOC removal, and collecting and treating vapor emissions from wastewater. Many VOCs, classified as TACs,
are discharged to the ambient atmosphere and transported to downwind receptors.
Some air management districts are enforcing regulations based on excess cancer risks
for lifetime exposures 10 chemicals such as benzene, trichloroethylene, chloroform, and
methylene chloride (Card and Co~i, 1992). Strategies for controlling VOCs at wastewater treatment plants are reviewed in Chap. 5.
Effluents containing chlorine residuals are toxic to aquatic life, and, increasingly,
provisions to eliminate chlorine residuals are being instituted. Other important heaJth
issues relate to the reduction of disinfection byproducts (DBPs} that are potencial carcinogens and are formed when chlorine reacts with organic matter. To achieve higher
and more consistent microorganism inactivation Levels, improved performance of disinfection systems must be addressed. In many communities, the issues of safety in the
transporting, storing, and handling of chlorine are also being examined.
Prior to about 1940, most municipal wa<;tewater was generated from domestic sources.
After 1940, as industrial development in the United States grew sjgnificantly. increasing
amounts of industrial wastewater have been and continue to be discharged to municipal
collection systems. The amounts of heavy metals and synthesized organic compounds
generated by industrial activities have increased, and some 10~000 new organic compounds are added each year. Many of these compounds are now found in the wastewater
from most municipalities and communities.
As technological changes take place in manufacturing, changes also occur in the
compounds discharged and the resulting wastewater characteristics. Numerous compoW1ds generated from indu->triai processes are difficult and costly to treat by conventional wastewater treatment processes. Therefore, effective industrial pretreatment
10
Chapter l
becomes an essential pan of tn overall water quality management program. Enforcement of an industrial pretreatment program is a daunting task, and some of lhe regulated pollutants still escape to the municipal wastewater collecLion ~}'sltill and must be
treated. In the future with the nbjecti\e of pollution prevention. every effon ~hould be
made by industrial Llischargn s to assess the cnvironmemaJ impacts of any new compounds that may enter the wastewater ~cream before being approved for us.e. If a compound cannot be treated effenively with existing technology, it should nut be u~ed.
111
ses or local conditions and need~. application of rscientific knowledge and engineering
judgment based on past experience, and consideration of federal, state, and local regulations. ln some ca~s. a detailed ri~k a~~e-;'iment may be required. An overview of wastewater treatment is pro\lided in llti~ se<.:tion. me rcu~e and disposal of biosolids, vexing
problems for some communities, are discussed in rhe following section.
Treatment Methods
Methods of treatment in which the application of physical forces predominate arc known
as unil operations. Mt:thud~ of lr~atment in whk:h the removal of cont~m1inants i ~ brought
about by chemical or biological reactions arc known a.'> unit processes. At the present
time, unit operations and processes are grouped togerner to provide various levels of
treatment known as preliminary. primary, advanced primary>secondary (without or with
nutriem removal). and advanced (or terriar)) (reatment (see Table 1-4). In preliminary
treatment, gross solids . ;uch a~; large obje<.:t~. mgs. and grit arc removed that may damage eqmpment. In primary rrcatm<:nt. a phy~ica l operation, usually sedimentation, is
used to remove the floating and .!.ettleahlc materials found in wastewater (see Fig. 1-4) .
.For advanced primal)' rreatmt:nt. chemical!> arc added ro enhance the removal of sus-
])fnded solids and. to a le!>~er ~>-.lent. di~;solved solid~. In secondary tre.aiment, bi!)log\
cal and chemica] pmcesse!- are used to remove most of the organic maHer. 1n advanced
treatment, additional comb ination~ of unit operations and processes are used w remove
residual suspended "iolids and or.her con"itituents that are not reduced significantly by
conventional secondary treatment. A li~ci ng of unit operations and processes used for
Table 1-4
Levels of wastewater
treatment level
Description
treatment0
Preliminary
Primary
Advonced primary
Secondary
Secondory with
nutrient removal
Terliory
Advanced
Tchobaooglous (l 9Q8).
12
Figure 1-4
Typical primary
sedimentation tanks
used to remove Rooting
from wastewater.
the removal of major consticuents found in wastewater and addressed in this text is pre~
sented in Table 1 ~5.
About 20 years ago, biolugJca1 nutrient removal (BNR)-for the removal of nitrogen and phosphoru5.-wa' viewed as an innovative process for advanced wastewater
treatment Because of the extensive research mto the mechaoisms of BNR, the advantages of il~ u.~. and the number of BNR systems that have been placed into operation.
nutrient removal, for all practical purposes, has become a part of conventional wastewater treatment. When compared to chemical treatment methods, BNR uses less chemical, reduces the production of waste solids, and has lower energy consumption.
Because of the importance of BNR in wastewater treatment, BNR is integrated into the
discussion of theoty, application, and de~ign of biological treatment systems.
Land treatment processes, commonly termed "natural systems." combine physical,
chemical, and biological treatment mechanisms and produce water with quality similar
to or bener than that from advanced wastewater treatment. Natural systems are not covered in this text as they are used mainly with small treatment systems; descriptions may
be found in the predec~~or edition of this text (Metcalf & Eddy, 1991) and in Crites
and Tchobanoglous (1998) and Crites et al. (2000).
Current Statu$
Up until the late 1980r.;, conventional secondary ttearment was the most COllUllon method
of treatment for the removal of BOD and TSS. In the United States, nutrient removal
was used in special circumstances, such as in the Great Lakes area, Aorida, and the
Chesapeake Bay, where semitive nutriem-reJated water quality conditions were identified. Because of nutrient enrichment that has led to eutrophication and water quality
degradation (due in part to point source discharges), nutrient removal proce.~;ses have
evolved and now arc used extensively in other areas as well.
As a result of implementation of the Federal Wacer Pollution ControJ Act Amendments, significant data havl' been obtained on the numbers and types of wa~tewater
facHities used and needed in accomplishing me goals of the program. Surveys are conducted by U.S. EPA ro track these data, and the results of me 1996 Needs Assessment
Survey (U.S. EPA, 1997a) are reported in Tables 1-6 and 1-7. The number and types of
113
Table 1-5
Unit operations and processes used to remove constitvents found in wastewater
Constituent
Suspended solids
Screening
Grit removal
Sedimentation
High-rate clarification
Flotation
Chemical precipitation
5
5
5
6
Depth filtration
II
Surface filtration
lI
Biodegradable organics
See Chop.
5
5
8, 14
9
10, 14
10
8
6, 11
6
I1
8, 11
Nutrients
Nitrogen
Phosphorus
11
lon exchange
11
6
8
9
Chemical treatment
Biologicol phosphorus removal
8, 9
8, 9
Pathogens
Chlor-ine compounds
Chlorine diol(ide
Ozone
Ultraviolet (UV) radiation
12
12
12
12
Membranes
l1
11
Chemical treatment
Carbon adsorption
lon exchon9e
11
Air stripping
Carbon adsorption
Advanced oxidation
5, 11
11
11
Odors
Chemical scrubbers
Carbon adsorption
Biofilters
Compost filters
ll
15
11, l5
15
15
14
facilities needed in the future ( ~20 yr) arc also shown in Table 1-7. These data are useful in forming an overall view of th~ current status of wastewater treatment in the
Uniced State!!.
The municipal wasrewater rreatmcnt enterprise is composed of over 16~000 plants
that are used to treat a total tluw (l [ ab1)Ut 1400 cubic meter~ per second {m1Js) [32,000
million gallon<; per day (Mgal/d)J. Approximacely 92 percent of the total exj~ting flow
is handled by plants having a capacity of 0.044 ru 3/s f1 million gallons per day
(Mgal/d)] and larger. Ncurl) one-half of the present de!-.ign capacity is situated in plants
Table 1.-6
Number of U.S.
wastewater treatment
focilitie~ by Row
range (1996) 0
Flow ranges
Number of
faciliti..
0.000-{).100
0.101 -l.OOO
1.001- 10.000
10.001- 100.00
0.ooo-Q.00438
0.0044-0.0438
0.044--().438
>1 00.00
TOMI existing
ftowrate
Mgal/d
m'/J
6,4.44
287
12.57
6,476
2,573
2}323
7,780
0.44-4.38
446
11 ,666
101.78
340.87
511.12
>4. :38
47
38
10,119
443.34
16,204
32,175
1,409.68
Othef-1>
Total
Table 1-7
Number of U.S. wastewater treatment facilities
ore met<J
FYtun focitr
(wt.a,....cnmet)
Existing facilitiM
Number of
facilitfes
Mgal/d
ms/s
Secondary
176
9,388
4,428
3,054
17,734
20,016
133.80
776.98
876.96
62.26
1,850.00
I.-vel of treatment
less than secondary
No dischorgec
Total
2,032
16,024
1;421
42,225
..
NumMrof
fadlti
lfteiiJ/d
,..,,,.:;.
61
601
26.33
9,738
6,135
2,369
17,795
779.65
28,588
l,252.53
1,803
18,303
48,787
78.99
2,137.50
1- 5 Wastewo1er Treatment
lu
providing greater than secondary treatment. Thus, the basic material presented in thls
text is directed toward the design of plants larger than 0.044 m3/s ( l MgaVd) with the
consideration that many new designs will provide treatment greater lhan secondary.
In the last I0 years. many plant" have been designed using BNR Effluent filtration
has also been installed where lhe removal of residual suspended solids is required. Filtra~
tion is especially effective in improving the effectiveness of disinfection, especially for
ultraviolet (UV) disinfection systems. bt:<.:ause (1) the removal of larger particles of suspended solids that harbor bacteria enhances the reduction in coliform bacteria and (2) the
reduction of turbidity improves the transmittance of UV light Effluent reuse systems,
except for many that are used for agricultural irrigation. almost always employ filtration.
16
Portions of the collection ~y:;tcm~. pm1k ulnrly those in the older cities in the eastern and midwe~tern United Srates, are older than the treatment plums. Sewers con~tructcd of brick and vitrified day "'" itt-. mortar joints, tor example, are still used to carry
sanitary wastewater and stornl\~ater. Became of rhe age of the pipes and ancillary structure~. the types of matcnals and methods of construction. and lack of repair. leakage is
common. Leakage i:; in Lhe form of both infiltration and intlow where warer enters the
collection sy~tem, and C)'.. tiltr;ation where w"ter leave~ the pipe. In Lhe former case,
extraneou') water has to he collected and treated, and oftentimes may overflow before
treatmem. especially during wet weather. ln the latter case, exfiltration cau~es untreated
wastewater to enter the groundwater and/or mig.rate to nearby surface water bodies. It
is intere~ti ng lu note th;.H wllile the standards for treatment have increased significantly,
comparatively little or no attf ntion has been focused on the disr.:harge of untreated
wastewater from sewer<; through cxfi ltration. In the future, however, leaking sewer) are
ex.pected to become a major concern and will require correction.
I 17
Treatment plant reliahilit} c.m be definl!d a:\ the probabihty that a system can meet
escablished performance criteria consiscemly over extended periods of time. Two component." of reliahihty. the mhercnt reliability of the process and mechanical reliubility,
are discussed in Chap. I5. As improved microbiological technique~ are developed, it
will be po~'ible to optimize th e disinfection process.
The need to conserve t>nergy and re!.ources i ~ fundamental to all aspects of
wa!'.>tewacer collection, treatment. 11nd reuse. Opcracion and maintenance co~l~ arc
extremely important to operating agencies becau!\e these cost~ arc funded totall} with
local money~. Detailed energ) analy...cs and audits are impon:ant part!> of trcalment
plant design and operation a') signi ticant savings can be realized by selecting e-nergyefficient pruces~es and c4uipmenl. Large amount~ of electricity are used for aeration
that is needed for biological treatmem. TyptcaJiy, about one-half of the entire plant
electricity usagr is for aerati( m. In the de'>ign of wa!'ttewater tn:atmelll plants power
use can he minim iled by paying more careful auention to plant siting, ~ekcting
energy-efficient e4uipmcnr. and d~-. igning fac ilities to recove1 t=m:rgy for in-pla11l
usc. Energy man agement in treatment plant design and operation i~ also con ~ idered
in Chap. 15.
Wastewater Disinfection.
ary eftluem (i.t:., in suspen1,ion or parti cle-a~sociated). Hi~lorically, chlorine ha!-t been
the disinfecwnt of chorce lor ~a--tewall.:r. Wirh the 1ncreasrng numher of pcnni t~ requiring low or nondetectablc amo unt~ of chlorine residual in treated effluents. dechlorination facilities have had ro b~ added. or chlonnation systems have been replaced by
alternative disinfection ~)'"tem'i such a..; u)traviolet (CV) radiation (see Fig. 1-6). Concerns about chemi~.:al :)afely hav~ also aftecteo design considerations of chlorination
and dechlorination .~ystem~. Improvements that have been made in UV lamp and ballast design within lhe p<l~t 10 }ears have tmproved sign1tic~ntly the performance and
reliabiJity of UV disi nfcciion )y:-.tems. Effecti-.e guidelines have aho been developed
for the application and de1:1ign of UV system ~ tNWRl, 2000). Capital and operating
costs have also been lowered. It is anticipated that the appJkation of UV for treated
drinking water and for !'ttorrnwalr r will continue to increase in the future. Bec.lu\e t :v
produces ec;sentially no rroublnome byproduct~ and is also effective in the reduction of
NOMA and other related r01 npound!>. it~!- u~c for disinfeclion 1s further ~nham:eJ a.~
compared to chlorine compound~.
18
I Chapter 1
figure 1-6
UV lamps used k>r
the disinfec~ on of
wosfe'NOter.
bed closures have been attributed to CSOs (Lape and Dwyer. 1994). Federal regulations
for CSOs are still under drvl"lopment and have not been issued at the time of writing
this text (200 1).
A combination of factor-; has resulted io the release of untreated wastewater from
partS of sanitary collection ~ystems. These releases are termed sanitary system overflows (SSOs). The SSOs may be caused by (1) the entrance of excessive amounts of
stonnwater, (2) blockages, or (3) structural, mechanical, or electrical failures. Many
overflows result from aging coUection systems that have not received adequate
upgrades, maintenance, and repair. The U.S.. EPA has estimated that at least 40,000
overflows per year occur from sanitary collection systems. The untreated wastewater
from these overflows represents threats to public health and the environment. The U.S.
EPA is proposing to clarify and expand permit requirements fur municipal sanitary collection systems under the Clean Water Act that will result in reducing the frequency and
occurrence of SSOs (U.S. EPA 2001 ). At the time of writing this text (2001) the pro-
posed regulations are under review. The U.S. EPA estimates that nearly $45 billion is
required for constru<.:ting facilities for controlling CSOs and SSOs in the United States
(U.S. EPA. 1997a).
The effecrs of pollution from nonpoint sources are growing concerns as evidenced
by the outbreak of gasrroime~tinal iHness in Milwaukee traced to the oocysts of Cryptosporidium parvum, and the occurrence of Pfiesteria piscicida in the waters of Maryland and North Carolina. Pfiesteria is a form of aJgae that is very toxic to fish life.
Runoff from pastures and feedlots has been attributed as a potential factor that biggers
the effects of these microorganisms.
1- 5 Wastewater Treatment
19
The extent (Jf lhe measure!\ that will be needed co control nonpoint sources is not
known at this time of writing this te>..t (200 I). When studies for assessing TMDLs arc
complet~...d (estimated ro be in 2008), the remedial measures for controlling nonpoint
sources may require tinancinl resource~ rivaling those for CSO and SSO correction.
Control of Odou and VOC Emissions. The control of odors and in paJticular the control of hydrogen o.; ullide generation is of concern in collection systems and at
treatment facilitie~. The release of hydrogen ~ulfide to the atmosphere above <;ewers and
at treatment plant headworks ha.!\ occurred in a number of location.'\, The release of
excess hydrogen sulfide ha!> led to the accelerated corrosion of concrete sewer~. head
works structures, and equipment, and to the release of odor!;. The control of odors ic; of
increasing environmental concern u.."i residential and commercial development con.tin~
ues to approach existing treatment plant locali ons. Odor control facilities mel uding covers tor process units, spec1<1l ventilation equipment, and treatment of odorous gases
need to be integrated Vl'ith treatment plant de~ign. Control of hydrogen suitide is also
fundamental to maintaining ~y~>tem reliability.
The presence of VOC ~ and VTOCs in wastewater has also nC(essitated the covering of trea(ment plant head works and primary treatment facilities and the installation of
special facilitie~ to treat me compounds before they arc released. In some cases,
improved industrial pretrt atment has been employed to eliminate these compounds.
20
Figure 1-7
Reverse OM"Oosis
membrane system
used for the removo I
of residuol suspended
solids remaining after
conventional secondory
treatment.
1-6 Wostewoter
21
must be reu~ed. The concept of rem,e is becoming accepted more widely as other pttrts
of the country experience watt'r ~hortagcs. The us~ of dual water systems, such as now
used in St. Petersburg in Florida and Rancho Viejo i.n California , is expected to increa-se
io the future. In both locauon~. treated e1fluent i~ used for land!.cape watering and other
nonpotahle uses. Satellite redamarion systems ~uch a<;, those used in the Los Angeles
basin, Where wastewat~r 11ow~ are mined (Withdrawn from collection .'>y)tems) l"or local
treatment and reuse, are examples where tran:iporlation and treatment costs of redaio1ed
water can be reduced significanlly. Because water reuse i~ expected to hecome of even
greater importance in the future. reuse applications are considered in Chap. 13.
Current Status
Most of the reuse of wastewaTer occur.-. in the arid and .~miarid western and souihwe~t
ern Slales of the United States; however. the number of reuse projects i<> incrca~ing in
the south especially in florida and South Carolina. Because of health and safety concerns, water reuse applications <lre moslly restricted to nonpotable u~c~ sul:h a~ landscape and agricultural irrigation. ln a report by the National Research Council ( 1998). it
was concluded that indirect potable reu~e of reclaimed water (mtroducing reclaimed
water to augment a potable water source before treatment) is viable. The report also
stated that direct potable reuse ~introducing reclaim~d wat~r directly into a water distlil>ution sy~tem) was not practtC<i.ble. Because of the concerns about potential health
effects associate with the rtdctimed water reuse, plans are proceeding sluwl)' about
expanding reu~e beyond agricultural and landscape irrigation, groundwater recharge for
repelling salrwater intrusjon. and nonpotable industrial uses (e.g., boiler water and cooling water).
ll)l)~)
report
regarding potential microbial und chemical contamination of water supplies also apply
to water sources that receive mcidenral or unplanned wastewatl:r discharges. A number
of communities use water sour(;cs that contain a significant wastewater component
Even though the<>e source~. after treatment, meet current drinking water standards. the
growing knowledge of the porential impacts of new trace contaminants raises concern.
Conventional technologies for both water and wastewater treatment may be incapable
of reducing the levels of trace contaminants below \\.'here they are not considered as a
potential threal to public health. Therefore, new technologies that offer sjgoificaocly
improved levels of treatment or constituent reduction need to be tested and evaJuated.
Where indirect potable reuse is considered, risk assessmenc also becomes an impoflam
component of a water reuse investigation. Risk assessment is addressed in Chap. I3.
22
reuse but also lc~~cn health n\ks. A~ indirect potable reuse intensifies to augment existing water supplie~. mclllbran~~ are expected to be one of the predominanl lreatment
technologies. Ad\lanced wa~tcwater treatment technologies are discussed in Chap. t 1,
and water reuse i~ con~idered in Chap. 13.
Current Statu.s
Treatment technologie~ for 'olld) proce"c;ing buve focused on traditional merhods such
as thickening, st<lbililation. dewatering. and drying. Evolution in the technologies has
not occurred a~ rapidly a~ in liqmd treatment proce')c;es, but some ~igniticant improvements have occurred. Centrifuge~ that produce a sludge cake with higher solids content,
egg-shaped digester~ rhat improve operation. and dryers that minimi7e water content
are just a few example~ uf product:-, that have come into use in recent years. These
development~ are largely driven b}' the nc:t:d to produce biosolid!> that arc clean, have
less volume, and can be ustd beneficially.
Landfills still continue to be used extensively for the disposal ot' treatment p\ant
solids, either in ~ludge -only monofills or with municipal solid waste. The number and
capacity of landfills. huwc\cr. have be~n reduced, and new landfill location~ that meet
public and regulatory ac~eptance and economic requirements are increasingly difficult
to find. Incineration of ~olid~ b> large municipa!Hies cominues to be practiced, but
incineration operation and tmission control are subject to greater regulatory restriccions
and adverse puhlit: s~.:ruti ny. Alternatives to landfills and im:ineration include tand
application of liquid or dri~..--d biosolids and composting for distribution and marketing.
Land applicatiotl of bio~o l i ds is used extensively to reclaim marginal land for productive uses and to utilize nutrient con lent in the biosolids. Composting, although a more
23
24
Figure 1-8
Egg-shaped digesturs
U$ed
treatment of biosolids.
requiring further processing and disposal. but allows composting or subsequent drying
to be performed more efficiently. Heat drying provides further volume reduction and
improves the quality of the product for potential commercial marketing. Each of the
newer methods of biosolids processing is described in Chap. l4.
REFERENCES
Boyd, J. (2000) "Unleashing chc Clean Water Act, the Promise and Challenge of the TMDL
Approach ro Wacer Quality," Resources, Issue 139.
Card, T. R., and R. L. Corsi (1992) "A Flexible Fate Model for VOCs in Wastewater," Water
ETnJironment & Technology. vol. 4, no. 3.
Crites, R. W., S. C. Reed, and R. K. Ba'>tion (2000) Land Treatment Systems for Municipal and
Industrial Wastes, McGraw-Hill. New York.
Crites, R., and G. Tchobanoglous (1998) Small and Decentralized Wasrewater Management
Systerru, McGraw-Hill, New YQrk.
Crook. J., J. A. MacDonald, and R. R. Trussel (1999) "Potable Use of Reclaimed Water,"
Journal American Water Wor.b Association, voL 91 , no. 8.
Curren, M. D. (1999) "Total Maximum Daily Loads," Environrntntal Protection. vol. 10,
no. 11.
Dreese, G. R., and J. A. Beecher ( 1997) "To Privatize or Not to Privatize, Water Emironment
& Techoology, vol. 9, no. I, Water Environment Federation. Alexandria, VA.
Federal Register (1988) 40 CFR Part 133, Secondary Treatment Regulation.
Federal Register (1989) 40 CFR Part 133, Amendments to the Secondary Treatment
Regulations: Percent Removal Requirements During Dry Weather Periods for T~ment
Work.s Served by Combined Sewers.
Federal Register (1993) 40 CFR Parts 257 and 503, Standards for the Disposal of Sewage
Sludge.
Lape, J. L., and T. J. Dwyer ( 1994) A New Policy on CSO.s, Water Environment & Technology,
vol. 6, no. 6.
Metcalf & Eddy, Inc. (1991) Wasrewater t :ngineering: Treatment, Disposal and Reuse, 3d ed.,