Fairhaven WWTP
Fairhaven, Massachussets
Many wastewater treatment facilities (WWTFs) in New England reside in one of the costliest electrical energy regions in the country and face a multitude of challenges including high energy costs and limited options for the beneficial reuse and disposal of biosolids. When designed and implemented correctly, an anaerobic digestion process integrated with a combined heat and power (CHP) system can be one of the most effective methods to help large and medium-sized WWTFs overcome these challenges. However, traditional methods of anaerobic digestion are typically not cost-effective for WWTFs with capacities less than approximately 10 MGD. The findings from a feasibility study performed by Brown and Caldwell show that anaerobic digestion with CHP can be developed cost-effectively using co-digestion and lower cost tank construction materials to provide the benefits of renewable energy production and sludge volume reduction for small to medium sized WWTFs. In addition to reductions in annual operating costs, anaerobic digestion and CHP projects can qualify for many new state and federal funding opportunities and incentives for renewable energy production and greenhouse gas reduction. Although recently developed, these programs have been continuously funded and continue to grow. Currently, Brown and Caldwell is applying for new federal funding opportunities as part of the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act, 2009. These include the US Department of Energy grant program for CHP systems under the Clean Energy and Industrial Efficiency Program, the Energy Efficiency Construction Block Grant Program, and the MA DEP Clean Energy State Revolving Fund. Source: WEFTEC 2009 Proceedings
Metric Used:
Posted: August 27th, 2010 | Filed under: Waste Water Treatment | Tags: Cost Savings, Energy Savings, Environmental Impact, Funding Incentives, Reduced Greenhouse Gas Emissions | No Comments »
CFPUA James A. Loughlin, Jr. WWTP
Wilmington, North Carolina
Anaerobic digestion is commonly utilized for wastewater residuals stabilization and generates a methane rich biogas stream. This technical paper evaluates seasonal and lifecycle cost considerations for beneficial utilization of this digester gas stream in the form of a case study at the CFPUA James A. Loughlin, Jr. WWTP. The beneficial utilization of digester gas for electrical power production has been shown to provide the following benefits for the CFPUA James A. Loughlin, Jr. (aka Northside)Wastewater Treatment Plant:
1. Both process configurations, non-CHP and CHP, generate positive economic value based on the lifecycle cost assessment and have an internal rate of return greater than the Owner’s estimated cost of capital (5.5%).
2. The CHP process configuration has the greatest rate of return on invested capital. The marginal rate of return associated with providing full CHP capability is also greater than the cost of capital. An incremental capital investment of $0.14 million dollars was shown
to generate an incremental benefit of approximately $1.32 million dollars. The resultant incremental benefit-to-cost ratio for this marginal expenditure is approximately 9.43 – meaning that each dollar of invested capital is creating $9.43 of present value.
3. The beneficial utilization of digester gas for electrical power production results in reduced greenhouse gas emissions as a renewable energy power source. Estimated GHG emissions reductions range from approximately 890 tons CO2 equivalents (tCO2e) per year under current conditions for a system configured to operate without combined heat and power capability to approximately 2,670 tCO2e per year under future operating conditions with full combined heat and power capability. In summary, significant economic and environmental benefits should be available for medium sized (10-mgd to 20-mgd) treatment facilities which have anaerobic digestion process equipment that are not currently beneficially utilizing digester gas beyond process heating demands. Source: WEFTEC 2009 Proceedings
Metric Used:
Posted: August 27th, 2010 | Filed under: Waste Water Treatment | Tags: Cost Savings, Energy Savings, Environmental Impact, Funding Incentives, Reduced Greenhouse Gas Emissions | No Comments »
This paper addresses the current status of water related outside capital funding in the United States. It specifically addresses recent changes in national funding priorities of the Administration and Congress. It also looks at recent federal and state agency developments associated with the implementation of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. While communities try to seek information, data and entry into unique capital funding opportunities, very little reliable information exists regarding how other communities have won past funding. This kind of information is critical to help communities through the maze of rules and regulations used by those who control more than $10 billion of capital water funding on an annual basis. This information is being provided from the experience gained through work with past funded projects (The information contained in this paper comes from 32 years of experience in assisting 250 communities obtain more than $1,350,000,000 in water related grants or loans across the United States. Out of this total experience, more than $300,000,000 has come from direct site specific line item appropriations through the U.S. Congress). It shows how, when and why capital funding is acquired. Source: WEFTEC 2009 Proceedings
Metric Used:
Posted: August 27th, 2010 | Filed under: Sanitary Sewer, Stormwater, Waste Water Treatment, Water Treatment | Tags: Cost Savings, Funding Incentives | No Comments »
Water infrastructure is a well-recognized asset that protects public health and water resources. Well-maintained water infrastructure also contributes substantially to every citizen’s welfare and to national prosperity. However, funding and investment are required to properly maintain these assets. Coupled with the need for water infrastructure investment is the fact that the United States is in a severe economic recession. For over twenty years the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has successfully provided financing for wastewater quality needs through the Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF). The Obama Administration and Congress have recognized the success of the CWSRF program by channeling an unprecedented level of funding through it via the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009. The objective of this manuscript is to provide up-to-date information on the CWSRF program and ARRA funding, specific ARRA requirements and status of implementation, and the possible future for
wastewater infrastructure financing efforts. Source: WEFTEC 2009 Proceedings
Metric Used:
Posted: August 27th, 2010 | Filed under: Sanitary Sewer, Stormwater, Waste Water Treatment, Water Treatment | Tags: Cost Savings, Funding Incentives | No Comments »