Phosphorus (P) is an essential and limited resource. Municipal wastewater is a promising source of P via reuse and could be used to replace P derived from phosphate rocks. The agricultural use of sewage sludge is restricted by legislation or is not practiced in several European countries due to environmental risks posed by organic micropollutants and pathogens. Several technologies have been developed in recent years to recover wastewater P. However, these technologies target different P-containing flows in wastewater treatment plants (effluent, digester supernatant, sewage sludge, and sewage sludge ash), use diverse engineering approaches and differ greatly with respect to P recycling rate, potential of removing or destroying pollutants, product quality, environmental impact and cost. This work compares 19 relevant P recovery technologies by considering their relationships with existing wastewater and sludge treatment systems. A combination of different methods, such as material flow analysis, damage units, reference soil method, annuity method, integrated cost calculation and a literature study on solubility, fertilizing effects and handling of recovered materials, is used to evaluate the different technologies with respect to technical, ecological and economic aspects. With regard to the manifold origins of data an uncertainty concept considering validity of data sources is applied. This analysis revealed that recovery from flows with dissolved P produces clean and plant-available materials. These techniques may even be beneficial from economic and technical perspectives under specific circumstances. However, the recovery rates (a maximum of 25%) relative to the wastewater treatment plant influent are relatively low. The approaches that recover P from sewage sludge apply complex technologies and generally achieve effective removal of heavy metals at moderate recovery rates (~40-50% relative to the WWTP input) and comparatively high costs. Sewage sludge ash is the most promising P source, with recovery rates of 60-90% relative to the wastewater P. The costs highly depend on the purity requirements of the recycled products but can be kept comparatively low, especially if synergies with existing industrial processes are exploited.
1 March 2018 in Resources, Conservation and Recycling
Direct and indirect greenhouse gases emissions of two model municipal WWTPs were estimated using carbon footprint analyses. One WWTP was designed with anaerobic digestion, the other one with simultaneous aerobic stabilization of sewage sludge. Emission factors were derived from literature values. For direct nitrous oxide emissions, a new estimation model based on measurements at eight Austrian WWTPs was applied. Results show that the direct nitrous oxide emission from the activated sludge tanks dominates the carbon footprint of WWTPs with a moderate nitrogen removal. Anaerobic digesters and anaerobic sludge storage tanks can also become a relevant source of direct methane emissions
In this contribution, we analyse scenarios of advanced wastewater treatment for the removal of micropollutants. By this we refer to current mainstream, broad spectrum processes including ozonation and sorption onto activated carbon. We argue that advanced treatment requires properly implemented tertiary (nutrient removal) treatment in order to be effective. We review the critical aspects of the main advanced treatment options, their advantages and disadvantages. We propose a quantification of the costs of implementing advanced treatment, as well as upgrading plants from secondary to tertiary treatment when needed, and we illustrate what drives the costs of advanced treatment for a set of standard configurations. We propose a cost function to represent the total costs (investment, operation and maintenance) of advanced treatment. We quantify the implications of advanced treatment in terms of greenhouse gas emissions. Based on the indicators of total toxic discharge, toxicity at the discharge points and toxicity across the stream network discussed in Pistocchi et al. (2022), we compare costs and effectiveness of different scenarios of advanced treatment. In principle the total toxic load and toxicity at the points of discharge could be reduced by about 75 % if advanced treatment processes were implemented virtually at all wastewater treatment plants, but this would entail costs of about 4 billion euro/year for the European Union as a whole. We consider a "compromise" scenario where advanced treatment is required at plants of 100 thousand population equivalents (PE) or larger, or at plants between 10 and 100 thousand PE if the dilution ratio at the discharge point is 10 or less. Under this scenario, the length of the stream network exposed to high toxicity would not increase significantly compared to the previous scenario, and the other indicators would not deteriorate significantly, while the costs would remain at about 1.5 billion Euro/year. Arguably, costs could be further reduced, without a worsening of water quality, if we replace a local risk assessment to generic criteria of plant capacity and dilution in order to determine if a WWTP requires advanced treatment.
In this report, tests on the impact of the sludge properties on the oxygen transfer at low and high solids contents are presented. Additional to the oxygen transfer tests, the activated sludge was intensively analysed to examine the changes of the α-factor in relation to the sludge properties (rheology, EPS, CST, etc.). The a-factor did strongly decrease in all sludge types at increasing MLSS or increasing viscosity, respectively. In the second test stage, the impact of the aeration system was examined in detail. For these tests, the same sludge from a membrane bioreactor was used throughout. Apart from the impact of the power density in the reactor and the specific air throughput, the main focus was on the economic efficiency of the examined systems in cases of high MLSS. It became apparent that up to solids contents of 18 g/l the fine-bubble aeration is the most economically efficient method.