<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Sustainability Archive &#187; 500K-1M</title>
	<atom:link href="http://sustainabilityarchive.com/category/population-served/500k-1m/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://sustainabilityarchive.com</link>
	<description>a Compendium of Successful Sustainability Practices</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 May 2011 16:30:27 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Process Recovery at the Humber Treatment Plant: “…by the people, for the people…” (Lincoln, 1863)</title>
		<link>http://sustainabilityarchive.com/process-recovery-at-the-humber-treatment-plant-%e2%80%9c%e2%80%a6by-the-people-for-the-people%e2%80%a6%e2%80%9d-lincoln-1863</link>
		<comments>http://sustainabilityarchive.com/process-recovery-at-the-humber-treatment-plant-%e2%80%9c%e2%80%a6by-the-people-for-the-people%e2%80%a6%e2%80%9d-lincoln-1863#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 May 2011 16:47:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>justin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[500K-1M]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Waste Water Treatment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Capital Savings]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Decreased Energy Consumption]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Improved Plant Sustainability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Operating Cost Savings]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reduced Carbon Footprint]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reduced Odor Problems]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sustainabilityarchive.com/?p=788</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Humber Treatment Plant (HTP) was experiencing severe settling problems. An opportunity to improve the performance of the HTP was seized by the plant’s Senior Engineer by developing and implementing a program of repair, continuous assessment, analysis, and tuning to ensure optimal operation of the aging infrastructure. Through the strategic utilization of existing inhouse expertise [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Humber Treatment Plant (HTP) was experiencing severe settling problems. An opportunity<br />
to improve the performance of the HTP was seized by the plant’s Senior Engineer by developing<br />
and implementing a program of repair, continuous assessment, analysis, and tuning to ensure<br />
optimal operation of the aging infrastructure. Through the strategic utilization of existing inhouse<br />
expertise and resources, a new benchmark of excellence, serving the community through<br />
improved and consistent effluent quality with accompanying odour reductions, was established.<br />
This achievement was accomplished paradoxically using less energy and chemicals, thus,<br />
significantly reducing the Humber’s environmental footprint. The direct delivery of these<br />
services by City staff, while further enhancing in-house knowledge, skill, and stewardship,<br />
eliminated the delays associated with project delivery using external contractors and made it<br />
possible to reap the immediate rewards. The monetary benefits to the City are savings in<br />
operating costs of $550,000 per year and capital savings of $6,000,000.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://sustainabilityarchive.com/process-recovery-at-the-humber-treatment-plant-%e2%80%9c%e2%80%a6by-the-people-for-the-people%e2%80%a6%e2%80%9d-lincoln-1863/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Improving Nutrient Removal While Reducing Carbon Footprint at Three Swiss WWTPs Thanks to Advanced Control</title>
		<link>http://sustainabilityarchive.com/improving-nutrient-removal-while-reducing-carbon-footprint-at-three-swiss-wwtps-thanks-to-advanced-control</link>
		<comments>http://sustainabilityarchive.com/improving-nutrient-removal-while-reducing-carbon-footprint-at-three-swiss-wwtps-thanks-to-advanced-control#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 May 2011 16:47:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>justin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[<50K]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[100K-500K]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[500K-1M]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Waste Water Treatment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ammonia Control]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cost Savings]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Energy Savings]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Environmental Impact]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Plant Sustainability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reduced Aeration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reduced Carbon Footprint]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reduced Greenhouse Gas Emissions]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sustainabilityarchive.com/?p=829</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Aeration consumes about 60% of the total energy of a WWTP and therefore makes up for a major part of its carbon footprint. Introducing advanced process control can help plants to reduce their carbon footprint and at the same time improve effluent quality through making available unused capacity for denitrification, if the ammonia concentration is [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Aeration consumes about 60% of the total energy of a WWTP and therefore makes up for a<br />
major part of its carbon footprint. Introducing advanced process control can help plants to reduce<br />
their carbon footprint and at the same time improve effluent quality through making available<br />
unused capacity for denitrification, if the ammonia concentration is below a certain set-point.<br />
Measuring and control concepts are a cost-saving alternative to the extension of reactor volume.<br />
However, they also involve the risk of violation of the effluent limits due to measuring errors,<br />
unsuitable control concepts or inadequate implementation of the measuring and control system.<br />
Dynamic simulation is a suitable tool to analyze the plant and to design tailored measuring and<br />
control systems.<br />
During this work, extensive data collection, modeling and full-scale implementation of aeration<br />
control algorithms were carried out at three conventional activated sludge plants with fixed predenitrification<br />
and nitrification reactor zones. Full-scale energy savings in the range of 16-20 %<br />
could be achieved together with an increase of total nitrogen removal of 40%.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://sustainabilityarchive.com/improving-nutrient-removal-while-reducing-carbon-footprint-at-three-swiss-wwtps-thanks-to-advanced-control/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Considerations for Alternative Supplemental Carbon Sources in Deep Bed Denitrification Filters to Achieve Low Effluent Nutrient Concentrations</title>
		<link>http://sustainabilityarchive.com/considerations-for-alternative-supplemental-carbon-sources-in-deep-bed-denitrification-filters-to-achieve-low-effluent-nutrient-concentrations</link>
		<comments>http://sustainabilityarchive.com/considerations-for-alternative-supplemental-carbon-sources-in-deep-bed-denitrification-filters-to-achieve-low-effluent-nutrient-concentrations#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 May 2011 16:47:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>justin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[500K-1M]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Waste Water Treatment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Alternative Carbon Testing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Partial Solids Removal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Phosphorus Reduction]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reduced Nitrogen]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sustainabilityarchive.com/?p=836</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The City of Baltimore has investigated various alternatives to meet the future effluent total nitrogen goal of 3 mg/L and current stringent total phosphorous limit of 0.2 mg/L at its Back River Wastewater Treatment Plant. The selected technology, deep-bed downflow denitrification filter, allows for both nitrogen reduction and partial solids removal. In an effort to [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The City of Baltimore has investigated various alternatives to meet the future effluent total<br />
nitrogen goal of 3 mg/L and current stringent total phosphorous limit of 0.2 mg/L at its Back<br />
River Wastewater Treatment Plant. The selected technology, deep-bed downflow denitrification<br />
filter, allows for both nitrogen reduction and partial solids removal. In an effort to confirm the<br />
design criteria, a small-scale filter pilot study was undertaken between January and July, 2009.<br />
As a result of comprehensive nutrient reduction initiatives for the Chesapeake Bay watershed,<br />
the demand for supplemental carbon sources such as methanol is growing and there has been a<br />
great deal of interest in the practicability of utilizing alternative carbon sources. Hence, it was<br />
also important to evaluate use of alternative carbon sources in order to (1) establish the carbon<br />
requirements specific to each substrate (for design considerations) and (2) evaluate operational<br />
conditions. This pilot study was segmented into three phases: methanol (as control), ethanol and<br />
MicroC™-glycerin. The results of this study suggest that, under warm temperature periods<br />
(~20C), the effluent nitrate (NOx-N) concentration of approximately 0.5 mg/L was achieved<br />
with all the carbon sources at or below the average nitrate loading rate of 38 lb/1000 ft3/day (0.6<br />
kg/m3/d). Even with higher loading rates, effluent quality did not degrade significantly and<br />
remained &lt; 1 mg/L most of the time. Observed COD/NOx-N ratios were ~5.5 (ethanol) and ~7.0<br />
(glycerin). Some operational differences were noted between methanol, ethanol and glycerin.<br />
Glycerin appeared to promote the growth of an unusual biofilm on all of the piping surfaces with<br />
which it came in contact, and had noticeably higher yield that led to an increase in backwash<br />
frequency when compared to ethanol. In summary, denitrification performance with both of the<br />
tested alternative carbon sources met removal requirements. This testing also confirmed that<br />
excess available carbon was needed in the filter effluent to maintain performance.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://sustainabilityarchive.com/considerations-for-alternative-supplemental-carbon-sources-in-deep-bed-denitrification-filters-to-achieve-low-effluent-nutrient-concentrations/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Cold Weather Design and Operational Considerations for Deep-bed Denitrification Filters to Achieve Limit-of-Technology Nutrient Removal</title>
		<link>http://sustainabilityarchive.com/cold-weather-design-and-operational-considerations-for-deep-bed-denitrification-filters-to-achieve-limit-of-technology-nutrient-removal</link>
		<comments>http://sustainabilityarchive.com/cold-weather-design-and-operational-considerations-for-deep-bed-denitrification-filters-to-achieve-limit-of-technology-nutrient-removal#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 May 2011 16:47:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>justin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[500K-1M]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Waste Water Treatment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cost Effective Treatment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nutrient Removal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tertiary Denitrification]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sustainabilityarchive.com/?p=840</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[For several decades deep bed downflow denitrification filters have proven reliable as tertiary treatment for achieving low effluent nitrogen levels. The majority of these facilities are operating in the southeastern region where wastewater temperatures are generally warmer. In recent years, a number of facilities have also been installed in the mid-Atlantic region to meet nutrient [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>For several decades deep bed downflow denitrification filters have proven reliable as tertiary<br />
treatment for achieving low effluent nitrogen levels. The majority of these facilities are operating<br />
in the southeastern region where wastewater temperatures are generally warmer. In recent years,<br />
a number of facilities have also been installed in the mid-Atlantic region to meet nutrient<br />
reduction requirements. While wastewater temperatures are comparably colder in this region<br />
most of these facilities are either operating in seasonal denitrification mode (low flow, warm<br />
period), or operating in filtration mode only (no external carbon addition) where the plant&#8217;s<br />
upstream process is capable of meeting current total nitrogen requirements. Also, it is found that<br />
many of these facilities are operating at lower loading conditions and therefore reported<br />
performance data may not be representative of design conditions. In an effort to confirm the<br />
design criteria for typical mid-Atlantic cold weather operation and year-round performance to<br />
meet limit-of-technology (LOT) levels (TN &lt; 3 mg/L, TP &lt; 0.3 mg/L) required for treatment<br />
plants in Maryland, as well as other jurisdictions within the Chesapeake Bay watershed, the<br />
Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE) and the City of Baltimore collaborated on a<br />
denitrification filter pilot testing program. Testing was conducted at the Back River WWTP<br />
from January through July of 2009 and the results are presented in this paper, and compared with<br />
performance observed at full-scale facilities.<br />
In summary, the cold weather testing demonstrated the system&#8217;s ability to achieve effluent<br />
objectives (for nitrate removal) at loading rates from 40-50 lbs nitrate/1,000 ft3/day. The average<br />
hydraulic loading rates were up to 3.0 gpm/ft2, with 80-90% removal efficiency at average<br />
wastewater temperatures of about 13 oC. During warmer weather testing the nitrate mass removal<br />
capacity increased and the system was able to achieve lower effluent concentrations at loadings<br />
similar to or higher than those for cold weather testing. The filter system was also hydraulically<br />
tested during warmer weather at peak-day loading rates up to 9 gpm/ft2 (at a loading near 100 lbs<br />
nitrate/1,000 ft3/day) while still achieving about 80% nitrate removal, demonstrating the system&#8217;s<br />
ability to handle peak flows and loads without significant reduction in effluent quality.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://sustainabilityarchive.com/cold-weather-design-and-operational-considerations-for-deep-bed-denitrification-filters-to-achieve-limit-of-technology-nutrient-removal/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Quantifying the Environmental Benefits of Real-Time Control in a Sewer Collection System</title>
		<link>http://sustainabilityarchive.com/quantifying-the-environmental-benefits-of-real-time-control-in-a-sewer-collection-system</link>
		<comments>http://sustainabilityarchive.com/quantifying-the-environmental-benefits-of-real-time-control-in-a-sewer-collection-system#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 May 2011 16:47:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>justin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[500K-1M]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sanitary Sewer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stormwater]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Waste Water Treatment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Enhanced Operational Efficiency]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Environmental Improvement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Improved Plant Reliability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reduced Combined Sewer Overflows]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sustainabilityarchive.com/?p=849</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The City of Indianapolis Department of Public Works (DPW) constructed eleven real-time controls (RTC) in the operation of the collection system between 1995 and 2004 to reduce combined sewer overflows (CSO). These eleven RTC facilities are part of the Early Action Projects (EAP) to reduce CSO frequency and volume. In 2009, DPW completed a hydraulic [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The City of Indianapolis Department of Public Works (DPW) constructed eleven real-time<br />
controls (RTC) in the operation of the collection system between 1995 and 2004 to reduce<br />
combined sewer overflows (CSO). These eleven RTC facilities are part of the Early Action<br />
Projects (EAP) to reduce CSO frequency and volume. In 2009, DPW completed a hydraulic<br />
performance evaluation of each RTC facility using a computer hydraulic model simulation of<br />
RTC operations, and successfully quantified their environmental benefits in CSO volume<br />
reduction. This evaluation helped DPW to demonstrate the feasibility of utilizing RTC in the<br />
collection system to reduce CSOs. This evaluation of the RTC facilities provided a basis for<br />
DPW to further investigate additional CSO control projects that can utilize RTC. This technical<br />
paper provides a case study on quantifying the environmental benefits of RTC in a large sewer<br />
collection system.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://sustainabilityarchive.com/quantifying-the-environmental-benefits-of-real-time-control-in-a-sewer-collection-system/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>A Case for Low Return Sludge Flow Rates</title>
		<link>http://sustainabilityarchive.com/a-case-for-low-return-sludge-flow-rates</link>
		<comments>http://sustainabilityarchive.com/a-case-for-low-return-sludge-flow-rates#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 May 2011 16:47:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>justin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[100K-500K]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[500K-1M]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[50k-100k]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Waste Water Treatment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Improved Effluent Quality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Improved Plant Efficiency]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Maximized Feast/Famine Conditions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Maximized Nitrification]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reduced Return Sludge Flow Rates]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sustainabilityarchive.com/?p=851</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A common problem encountered by traditional activated sludge systems involves failure to develop biomass that separates efficiently from the liquid, leaving behind a clear effluent that is low in BOD5 and suspended solids. Another problem is the bleed-through of ammonia due to low detention time in the aeration tank. Oftentimes, failure may be attributed to [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A common problem encountered by traditional activated sludge systems involves failure<br />
to develop biomass that separates efficiently from the liquid, leaving behind a clear<br />
effluent that is low in BOD5 and suspended solids. Another problem is the bleed-through<br />
of ammonia due to low detention time in the aeration tank. Oftentimes, failure may be<br />
attributed to high return sludge flow rates (RSF) that affect not only clarifier hydraulics,<br />
but also the growth of bacteria in the system. In order to promote efficient separation and<br />
nitrification, system conditions should be maintained that favor the growth of flocforming<br />
bacteria and nitrifiers over nuisance microorganisms that may include filaments.<br />
Favorable conditions are encouraged by a regime of higher detention time and feast and<br />
famine experienced by the bacteria in the system. By viewing system operation through<br />
this lens, the following paper proposes that many activated sludge treatment systems can<br />
achieve significant operational improvement through reduction in RSF. This paper<br />
further provides a method for minimizing RSF and presents examples of successful<br />
application of this method.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://sustainabilityarchive.com/a-case-for-low-return-sludge-flow-rates/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Co-digestion at Annacis Island WWTP: Metro Vancouver’s Path to Renewable Energy and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions</title>
		<link>http://sustainabilityarchive.com/co-digestion-at-annacis-island-wwtp-metro-vancouver%e2%80%99s-path-to-renewable-energy-and-greenhouse-gas-emissions-reductions</link>
		<comments>http://sustainabilityarchive.com/co-digestion-at-annacis-island-wwtp-metro-vancouver%e2%80%99s-path-to-renewable-energy-and-greenhouse-gas-emissions-reductions#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 May 2011 16:47:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>justin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[500K-1M]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Waste Water Treatment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cost Savings]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Energy Production]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Environmental Impact]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Improved Plant Performance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Improved Plant Sustainability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reduced Carbon Footprint]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reduced Greenhouse Gas Emissions]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sustainabilityarchive.com/?p=855</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Annacis Island Wastewater Treatment Plant which is operated by Metro Vancouver, is leading the way in working within a carbon based regulatory environment. British Columbia has instituted carbon reduction legislation province wide, a leader in North America. As a result public entities, such as Metro Vancouver, must be carbon neutral by 2012. In response the [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Annacis Island Wastewater Treatment Plant which is operated by Metro Vancouver, is leading<br />
the way in working within a carbon based regulatory environment. British Columbia has<br />
instituted carbon reduction legislation province wide, a leader in North America. As a result<br />
public entities, such as Metro Vancouver, must be carbon neutral by 2012. In response the utility<br />
is holistically investigating different approaches to achieve the required GHG reductions. One<br />
approach now being actively pursued is the implementation of co-digestion at Annacis Island.<br />
Having developed a the scope for a full co-digestion program at the plant, a pilot facility was<br />
constructed to provide further process controls as well as a start at reducing emissions by codigesting<br />
material at the plant. This project also provided Metro Vancouver a basis of handling<br />
its own sludges from other wastewater treatment plants on an emergency or planned basis by<br />
dual tasking the receiving facility to receive both sludges and co-digestion substrates.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://sustainabilityarchive.com/co-digestion-at-annacis-island-wwtp-metro-vancouver%e2%80%99s-path-to-renewable-energy-and-greenhouse-gas-emissions-reductions/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Utility Operations under Financially and Politically Constrained Conditions</title>
		<link>http://sustainabilityarchive.com/utility-operations-under-financially-and-politically-constrained-conditions</link>
		<comments>http://sustainabilityarchive.com/utility-operations-under-financially-and-politically-constrained-conditions#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 May 2011 16:24:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>justin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[500K-1M]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stormwater]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Waste Water Treatment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Water Treatment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Business Process Redesign]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cost Savings]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Improved Plant Efficiency]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Improved Process Flow]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sustainabilityarchive.com/?p=822</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[With the world economy struggling under a severe recession water utilities are experiencing difficulties in continuing their business operations. They also face political challenge since they are directly responsible to the communities they serve and at the same time their customers are also their constituency. During such politically and financially constrained times, utility operators have [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>With the world economy struggling under a severe recession water utilities are<br />
experiencing difficulties in continuing their business operations. They also face political<br />
challenge since they are directly responsible to the communities they serve and at the<br />
same time their customers are also their constituency. During such politically and<br />
financially constrained times, utility operators have been forced to look into new ways to<br />
cut costs and improve efficiency. Our experience shows that water utilities can become<br />
more efficient via implementation of various strategies such as business process redesign<br />
and implementation of lean six sigma techniques. Utilizing the above mentioned<br />
strategies enabled Gwinnett County, GA’s Department of Water Resources (DWR) to<br />
improve its process flow and eliminate waste, decrease personnel required for process<br />
execution, reduce on-hand inventory and ordering costs, and to completely eliminate<br />
Total Potential Stock-out Situations.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://sustainabilityarchive.com/utility-operations-under-financially-and-politically-constrained-conditions/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>MAKING ENERGY FROM BIOSOLIDS, FATS, OILS AND GREASE</title>
		<link>http://sustainabilityarchive.com/making-energy-from-biosolids-fats-oils-and-grease</link>
		<comments>http://sustainabilityarchive.com/making-energy-from-biosolids-fats-oils-and-grease#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 May 2011 16:24:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>justin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[500K-1M]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stormwater]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Waste Water Treatment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Water Treatment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cost Savings]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Energy Savings]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Environmental Impact]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Heat Production]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Improved Energy Production]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Improved Plant Sustainability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reduced Carbon Footprint]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reduced Greenhouse Gas Emissions]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sustainabilityarchive.com/?p=859</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The F. Wayne Hill Water Resources Center (FWHWRC), owned and operated by the Gwinnett County, GA, Department of Water Resources (DWR), is an advanced wastewater treatment plant which currently discharges into the Chattahoochee River and Lake Lanier. The FWHWRC maximum month design flow is 60 million gallons per day (mgd) and currently about 30 mgd [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The F. Wayne Hill Water Resources Center (FWHWRC), owned and operated by the Gwinnett<br />
County, GA, Department of Water Resources (DWR), is an advanced wastewater treatment plant<br />
which currently discharges into the Chattahoochee River and Lake Lanier. The FWHWRC<br />
maximum month design flow is 60 million gallons per day (mgd) and currently about 30 mgd of<br />
wastewater is received.<br />
In light of rising energy costs and declining revenues reflective of the continuing, severe<br />
economic downturn that began in 2007, the Gwinnett County DWR began an initiative to make<br />
the best possible use of resources under DWR control, including renewable energy resources.<br />
DWR retained CH2M HILL to identify and evaluate opportunities to improve resource<br />
utilization and reduce energy costs at the FWHWRC. The results of the evaluations, procedures<br />
for capturing stimulus funding, and technologies employed are discussed in this paper.<br />
The energy types considered for the FWHWRC were biogas derived from anaerobic digestion,<br />
solar, wind, and low-head hydropower. A screening analysis concluded that biogas combustion<br />
to produce power and heat was the optimum alternative.<br />
Next, a Business Case Evaluation (BCE) was conducted to determine if the construction and<br />
operation of a gas-to-energy facility would be economically feasible. The BCE considered<br />
several different scenarios for generating power from biogas, including biogas production with<br />
and without addition of fats, oil &amp; grease (FOG) and high strength waste (HSW) to the existing,<br />
anaerobic sludge digesters.<br />
The BCE concluded that a gas to energy facility based on an internal combustion engine (ICE)<br />
was feasible. The proposed system, in addition to continuously generating electrical energy for<br />
use at the FWHWRC, would be capable of producing sufficient heat to keep the anaerobic<br />
digesters operating in the mesophilic temperature range of 95-100 degrees Fahrenheit (F). By<br />
capturing the heat produced by the ICE, in addition to generating power, the system would have<br />
a total energy-recovery efficiency approaching 80%.<br />
The BCE recommended a gas to energy facility of approximately 2 megawatts (MW) in capacity<br />
at the FWHWRC. The biogas requirement at a nominal 600 British Thermal Units (BTU) per<br />
cubic foot (ft3) for an ICE of this capacity is approximately 520 standard cubic feet per minute<br />
(scfm). However, as the FWHWRC is at only about 50% of its total design capacity, the<br />
currently available biogas is considerably less than 520 scfm, and a purchased natural gas fuel<br />
blend would be required to obtain full power generation and heat recovery benefits. To minimize purchase of natural gas, maximize biogas, and as a result improve the return on<br />
investment in the cogeneration system, DWR next investigated addition of FOG and high<br />
strength waste (HSW) to the anaerobic digesters to supplement the solids feed. The project was<br />
made even more attractive by DWR’s successful pursuit of funding under the American<br />
Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), as administered by the Georgia Environmental<br />
Facility Administration (GEFA), and from the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE).<br />
A schematic design of the system with specifications was prepared for competitive selection of a<br />
design-build contractor. The design-build contract was awarded in October 2009. The contract<br />
value is $5.19 million and includes the installation of a 2.1 MW engine generator along with<br />
digester gas cleaning and drying equipment. The gas-to-energy facility is expected to reach<br />
substantial completion by the end of 2010 with contractual completion in May 2011.<br />
A second RFP for the design and construction of a FOG and HSW receiving facility was<br />
advertised in February 2010. The design-build contract was awarded in June 2010 at a contract<br />
value of $3.16 million. Its completion and startup will closely follow the completion and startup<br />
of gas cogeneration facilities.<br />
Once operational, the FOG/HSW handling and cogeneration facilities will have the potential to<br />
save over one million dollars annually in power costs and generate more revenue in FOG and<br />
HSW disposal fees. When operating at its rated capacity, the resulting power production will<br />
offset the amount of fossil fuel used to generate over 17,000 MW-hours of electrical power<br />
annually.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://sustainabilityarchive.com/making-energy-from-biosolids-fats-oils-and-grease/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Force Mains: Not To Be Forgotten Assets</title>
		<link>http://sustainabilityarchive.com/force-mains-not-to-be-forgotten-assets</link>
		<comments>http://sustainabilityarchive.com/force-mains-not-to-be-forgotten-assets#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 May 2011 16:24:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>justin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[500K-1M]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Waste Water Treatment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Enhanced Asset Management Plan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Improved Plant Reliability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Optimized Force Main Inspection]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sustainabilityarchive.com/?p=883</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[During the development of the Johnson County Wastewater District (JCW) Asset Management Plan it became apparent the available data in the current system did not include sufficient information on the force mains. To evaluate the condition of the force mains and provide the missing information the District is embarking on a comprehensive and proactive approach [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>During the development of the Johnson County Wastewater District (JCW) Asset Management<br />
Plan it became apparent the available data in the current system did not include sufficient<br />
information on the force mains. To evaluate the condition of the force mains and provide the<br />
missing information the District is embarking on a comprehensive and proactive approach to<br />
prioritization and inspect their force main assets. With the growing environmental awareness<br />
and ever increasing stringent environmental regulations, JCW took a proactive approach to<br />
develop force main asset management protocols and develop an inspection prioritization matrix.<br />
With nearly 40 miles of force mains, JCW’s inventory is comprised of pipes varying in size,<br />
material type, age and condition.<br />
This paper documents the implementation of asset management principles to develop an<br />
inspection prioritization matrix based on risk analysis, recommended inspection technologies<br />
and procedures for collecting data through scheduled routine physical inspections.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://sustainabilityarchive.com/force-mains-not-to-be-forgotten-assets/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

