1605. water sustainability through the use of advanced ... · use of advanced biological nutrient...

26
August 2014 Rick Johnson Clearas Water Recovery Vice President, Business Development Water Sustainability through the use of Advanced Biological Nutrient Recovery

Upload: trinhcong

Post on 16-Sep-2018

217 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

August 2014Rick Johnson

Clearas Water RecoveryVice President, Business Development

Water Sustainability through the use of Advanced Biological 

Nutrient Recovery 

Agenda• Who we are• What is the technology• What are the results

Missoula, MT

Cleveland, OH

Clearas locations

Installations

Active pilots

• Founded in 2007• US patented technology• Focus on the advanced biological treatment of water

• Focus on commercialization• Proven experience in multiple industries

Costa Rica

Whether something is a problem…..

Depends on how you look at it.

"Vision without action is a daydream.   Action without vision is a nightmare."  

Algae as a process / service• US Patent 8,101,080

Proven in multiple industry verticals• Municipal Wastewater• Agricultural• Pulp & Paper• Beverage• Ethanol Production• Anaerobic Digestion• Industrial Laundry • Fish Processing• Aquaculture• Chemical and Fertilizer

CO2 consumption & O2 releaseBiomass co‐productReusable water

SEPARATION

NUTRIENT RECOVERY

BLEND

Clean Water

Algae Return

CO2

Algae HarvestPure 

oxygen

83% 267% 500%

Activated Sludge Clearas ABNRReturn Activated Sludge (RAS) Return Activated Algae (RAA)

Waste Activated Sludge (WAS) Waste Activated Algae (WAA)

Wasting Harvest

Food/Mass Ratio Culture density

TP TN Ammonia BOD TSS TKNMunicipal 98.7% 58.9% 95.0% 85.2% 96.1% 85.5%Industrial 95.2% 92.8% 89.5% 96.5% 100.0% 94.4%Agricultural 99.6% 95.1% 92.3% 95.3% 100.0% 95.0%

0.0%

20.0%

40.0%

60.0%

80.0%

100.0%

Average redu

ction, %

Average reduction, %Municipal Industrial Agricultural

0

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05

0.06

0.07

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Treated TP

, mg/L

Raw TP, mg/L

Raw vs Treated TP, municipal

Constituent, mg/l

NH3 TKN NO2/NO3 TN TP TDS TSS

Raw 0.16 0.9 4.28 5.18 0.11 450 ND

Treated 0.02 ND 0.36 0.36 0.01 306 ND

Pilot in progress

Constituent Units Raw  Treated % reductionNH3 mg/l 229 3.62 98.4%BOD mg/l 3000 4 99.9%CBOD mg/l 716 3 99.6%TKN mg/l 320 4.73 98.5%TN mg/l 320 4.93 98.5%TP mg/l 178 0.02 100.0%TSS mg/l 2600 ND 100.0%FOG (HME) mg/l 22 ND 100.0%

10 MGD

Integrated solutions for industrial applications• Food processing• Beverage production• Aquaculture• Fish processing• Beef rendering

Municipal wastewater treatmentNorthwest region municipality primary challenge –total phosphorus

Constituent Before* After* % Removal

Total P (mg/L) 0.625 0.036 94.14%

TSS (mg/L) 12.18 0.24 98.00%

PCB (pg) 2141 144.1 93.00%

14

Missoula Wastewater Plant Results:

Constituent  Before After % RemovalTotal P (mg/L) 0.29 0.035 87.93%

Ammonia (mg/L)  1.038 0.012 98.84%

Total N (mg/L) 8.26 3.188 61.40%

TSS (mg/L) 3.8 0.021 99.45%

15

Inland Empire Paper Company Results

16

Dalton Utility Plant Results:Constituent  Before After % Removal

Total P (mg/L) 2.68 0.18 93.3%

Ammonia (mg/L)  0.60 0.05 91.7%

Total N (mg/L) 14.1 3.26 76.9%

Characteristic Site 1 Site 2Moisture 5.56 9.28Nitrogen 5.61 7.76Protein 35.10 48.26Fat 1.70 4.23Carb 23.1 23.1P2O5 3.04 2.20Potash 0.702 0.803Ash 34.60 15.12

Site Flow (MGD)

Total Phosphorus, mg/L Volumeto treat % of Total Estimated 

Savings, $MCurrent Target

Region 4 20  2.58 1.00 12.4 62.0% $19.0

Region 2 3.4 0.50 0.375 0.9 26.5% $6.3

Region 1 80 0.45 0.10 67.5 84.3% $31.3

Region 1 45 0.47 0.10 38.3 85.1% $16.8

Region 1 28 0.17 0.10 15.0 53.5% $32.5

Savings based on $2.50/gal. capex estimate

?

All information contained in this presentation is strictly confidential and proprietary.  Not for distribution. Copyright AlgEvolve 2013

Summary• Proven solution to next generation nutrient targets• Scalable• Sustainable• Significant potential cost savings

– Capex– Opex– NPW

Thank You

26

Rick [email protected]