p2infohouse.orgi” 1998 food processors conference: lncreasing your profits & lmproving your yield...

Increasing Your Profits & Improving Your Yield Through Product Recove y

&"a Southem University korgia Tech Research Institute IaIdLta State University

The University of Georpa

i”

1998 Food Processors Conference:

lncreasing Your Profits &

lmproving Your Yield Through

Product Recovery

September 22,1998

Georgia Center CI for Continuing

Education

The University of Georgia Athens, Georgia

Slpnsored bv:

m i a Environmental Technical AssistancePmgram

FQad Processing Advisory CoundCFaodPAC G4a Environmental Partnetsh Pallution Prevention Assistan lim Departments of:

JI

- Biological &. Agricu - Poultry Science - Food Science & Tech 9, Tech Economic Devebpmentlnstitute bwgia Southern University Valdpsta State University 0 Oeargi Tech Research Institute 9

Welcome: POLLUTION PREVEMION ASSISTANCE DlViS 7MARTiN LUIHERKING JRURSWSTEW AllUilb%m@m

- Evaluation Form

Measuring & Analyzing Your Waste Stream - Measuring Your Waste Stream - Laboratory Analysis of Wastewater

Minimizing Environ. ImiDactsIReaula toty Issues - Regulatory Issues Facing Food Processors - Risk Management Program Update

Session Two: (continued)

- Negotiating Your Wastewater Discharge Permit - HACCP & Regulatory Effects on Water Usage

Developing A Product Recoverv Plan

- Elements of a Water Minimization I Conservation Plan

Session Three: (continued)

- Minimizing Water Use & Pollution In Process Equipment Cleaning

Session Three: (continued)

- Doing It Right The First Time: A Statistical Approach

HANDS-ON PROBLEM SOLVING SET:

- How Many Of Your $3 Are Going Down The Drain?

Keynote I Testimonials / Case Studies: - Continental Grain - Almark Foods

Additional Materials: -Water Conservation - Product Recovery - Waste Minimization

I f

\ \ 1

J

- - . .. . -. . .. -- -. .. .., .. _ _ _ ,

UNIVERSITY OF GEORGI 1. Arch 2 chapel 3. OldGaMuseumofArt A Mainlibrary 5. Academic Building 6. Admissionsoffi 7. GilbertHealthCenter

A

c

8. FoundersMemorialGarden 9. Fine Arts Building

10. Tate Student Center 11. Sanford Stadium 12 UGABookstore 13. StegemanColi

15. Ga. Center for Continuing

l7. Butts-MAre Heritage Hall 18. College of Veterinary Medicine l9. ScienceLibrary a0. PwformingArtsCenter 21. School of Music P New Georgia Museum of A P Ramseystudentcent

Agenda for:

Increasing Your Profits & Improving Your Yield Through Product Recovery 1

Tuesday, September 22,1998 Georgia Center for Continuing Education - University of Georgia

Time Topic

8:OO a.m.

8:30 a.m.

Registration and Continental Breakfast

Welcome & Introduction of Keynote Speaker

Soeaker

Dr. Bobby Tyson

8:45 a.m. Keynote Address Mr. Jim Friess Food Processors Concems with Product Losses and Discharge Compliance

Session One: Measurina and Analvsina Your Waste Stream

9:15 a.m. Measuring your Waste Stream Dr. Bill Merka

9:45 a.m. Laboratory Analysis of Wastewater Dr. Egerton Whittle

10:15 a.m. - 10:30 a.m. REFRESHMENTBREAK 10:30 a.m. Testimonial - Tip Top Poultry Mr. Robin Bumrss

Session Two: Minimizina Environmental Impacts / Reaulatorv Issues I Cost of Compliance

11:OO a.m.

11:30 a.m.

12:OO p.m. - 1:OO p.m. LUNCH 1:00 p.m. Case Study - Almark Foods Mr. Mark Papp 1 :20 p.m.

1:40 p.m.

Wastewater Regulatory Issues Facing Food Processors

Georgia EPD - Risk Management Program Update Mr. Jim Walsh

Ms. Christina Walls

Negotiating Your Wastewater Discharge Permit

HACCP & Regulatory Compliance Effects on Water Usage

Mr. Brian Kiepper

Dr. A.Estes Reynolds

Session Three: DeveloDinn A Product Recovery Plan

2:OO p.m.

2:30 p.m.

3:OO p.m.

3:30 p.m.

Elements of A Waste Minimization & Water Conservation Plan

Minimizing Water Use & Pollution in Process Equipment Cleaning

Doing It Right The First Time: A Statistical Approach

Hands-on Problem Solvina Set - How Many of Your $s Are Going Down The Drain?

Dr. Bill Merka

Mr. Paul Crumpler

Dr. David Gibson

) 4:OO p.m. GEP & FoodPAC Impact Dr. Jackie Sellers

4A5p.m. ADJOURN

Speaker I Contact List

Paul Crumpler Georgia Department of Natural Resources Pollution Prevention Assistance Division 7 Martin Luther King, Jr., Dr., Suite 450 Atlanta, Georgia 30334-9004

Phone: (404) 651-5120 E-mail: [email protected]

Dr. David Gibson Vaklosta State University Department of Mathematics &

VaMosta, Georgia 31698-0040 Computer Science


Brian Kiepper The University of Georgia Biological 8 Agricultural Engineering Driffmier Engineering Center Athens, Georgia 30602

Phone: (706) 5424907 E-mail: [email protected]

Dr. Bill Merka The University of Georgia Poultry Science Department 314 Livestocklpouby Building Athens, Georgia 30602


Dr. A. Estes Reynolds The University of Georgia Food Science & Technology Department Four Towers Building Athens, Georgia 30602


Christina Walls Georgia Department of Natural Resources Environmental Protection Division 7 Martin Luther King, Jr., Dr., Room 139 Atlanta, Georgia 30334

Phone: (404) 656-7802

Jim Walsh Georgia Institute of Technology Georgia Tech Research Institute 039 O'Keefe Building Atlanta, Georgia 30332-0800


Dr. Egerton Whittle The University of Georgia Feed & Environmental Laboratory College Station Road Athens, Georgia 30602


mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]

FOODPAC Home Page http:llfoodpac.gatech.ec

G E 0 R C I A

FOODPAC Organization

ODeratinq Strateey

Planning, Q&

_ - - - - - _ _ - - - -

ODPAC FOOD PROCESSING AUWSOPY COUNCfl

Georgia’s Food Processing Industry Program and FOODPAC

As part of Governor Zell Miller’s economic development thrust for traditional industries, the Food Processing Industry Program was started in June 1993. It resulted in the formation of a public-private partnership among the food industry, Georgia’s institutions of higher education, and Georgia’s state agencies. That partnership is called the Food Processing Advisory Council, or FOODPAC.

In 1994 FOODPAC defined its vision as seeking to make Georgia the national and international leader in food processing in the 21st century.

Toward that end, the Food Processing Industry Program was given the mission of seeking to enhance the competitiveness of Georgia’s food processing and allied industries in order to provide for economic growth through expansion of existing industries and the attraction of new food-related industries.

The program addresses this mission by:

identifying critical issues affecting the competitiveness of the industry; developing realistic strategies that address identified issues; creating a network of excellence in research and development between colleges and universities in Georgia and the food processing industry; developing and delivering high-impact programs targeted on critical needs; initiating a mechanism to evaluate the overall effectiveness of activities undertaken.

FOODPAC Organization

FOODPAC provides a range of coordination, dissemination, and oversight functions for Georgia’s Food Processing Program. Organizationally, the council is structured into a steering committee and three technical committees.

The Steering Committee

0 oversees the project-selection process and makes the final recommendation for project funding to the governor;

9/14/90 450 PN/

http:llfoodpac.gatech.ec

FOODPAC Home Page http://foodpac.gatech.ecc

0 elects a private-sector representative to serve as chair; 0 coordinates the establishment of program priorities and the

dissemination of program result.

The Technical Committees

0 establish specific industry priorities for their respective technical

0 review submitted project proposals for technical merit and

0 review progress and completion of projects.

areas;

response to identified need and rank each in order;

Be turn to the too of the n a s

Operating Strategy

Since its formulation, FOODPAC has developed a three-pronged investment strategy for accomplishing its mission:

0 to support priority research and development that helps position

0 to provide technical and practical assistance to the industry as it Georgia’s food industry for leadership in the 2 1 st century

converts to more sophisticated processing technologies and techniques and higher value-added products;

0 to provide regulatory assistance to the industry in meeting and maintaining compliance with the growing body of applicable state, federal, and international regulations, particularly in the food safety and environmental fields.

Rerum to the ton of the mgf;

Planning Cycle

FOODPAC issues an annual Call for Project Proposals in the spring of each year. All proposals are due to the council in mid-summer, at which time they are reviewed and prioritized by the technical committees and a final funding plan is developed by the steering committee for submission to the governor by September.

The final budget is recommended by the governor and approved by the legislature by March. Any differences between the funding requested by FOODPAC in September and the funding ultimately approved in March are rectified by the steering committee in April as part of the final project selection process. Project notification takes place in May, and approved projects start up in July with the new state fiscal year.

2of3

Return to the ton of the o a q

9/14/98 450 PI!

http://foodpac.gatech.ecc

FOODPAC - The Food Industry in Georgia http:Nfoodpac.gatech.edu/fp-foodind. htt

C E 0 R G I A

ODPAC FOOO PROCESSING ADVISORY COtlNCil

The Food Industry in Georgia

Food processing is one of Georgia’s leading industrial sector and one of the largest industrial employers in Georgia.

The industry

0 employs more than 55,000 individuals; 0 includes over 460 small, medium, and large companies with more than 800

0 has a total value of shipments in excess of $12.8 billion annually. plant locations across the state;

One of the unique features of Georgia’s food processing industry is its broad diversity in terms of size, production, and geographic distribution. Virtually every region of the state feels the economic impact of this important industrial sector.

--.-.- Office of

Food Industry Programs ....-. The Importance of the Food Processing Industry in Georgia

Manufacturing is a vital part of Georgia’s economic well-being. Almost one in four employed persons in Georgia in 1990 worked in this sector ( C o u n ~ Business Patterns, 1990. Bureau of the Census). Of those workers employed in manufacturing, 54.000 were directly involved in manufacturing food products - taking the raw materials produced by the agricultural sector and transforming them into goods that can be either consumed in Georgia or shipped throughout the United States and abroad. Important Georgia products, such as peaches, peanuts, and poultry, find their way into the American kitchen as frozen fruits, roasted nuts and peanut butter, and chicken filets. The food processing industry in Georgia gives the consumer convenient and safe agricultural products that in their raw form can be highly perishable or inconvenient for today’s busy consumer to prepare.

The food processing industry is part of a complex, interlinking group of sectors, and the industry’s impact is felt on many other sectors as well. For example, its prosperity affects transportation; wholesale and retail trade; and construction - food products must be transported, warehoused, and sold. Furthermore, researchers, economists, marketing experts, advertisers, and government regulatory agencies involved with aspects of food processing are part of this complex scenario. So is the consumer whose continues health and welfare are dependent on a high-quality, affordable product.

Georgia’s population of 6,478,2 16 (1990 Census) is 2.6 percent of the national total (248,709,873). However, Georgia’s food processing industry produces a far greater percentage in key areas than its percentage of population. The state produces 14 percent of all poultry nationally; 6 percent of bakery products; 5.8 percent of sugar and confectionary products (which includes salted and roasted nuts); 3.8 percent of fats and oils; 3.6 percent of beverages; and 3.2 percent of grain mill products.

Following a national trend, Georgia’s food processing establishments decreased in number from 1972 to 1990. However, while the number of employees in the national food processing sector fell by over 100,000 (from 1.569 million to 1.452 million) during this period, Georgia’s employment in this sector rose from 46,200 to 54,000. Nationally, value of food shipments increased fiom $1 15 billion in 1972 to $384

l o f 2 9/14/98 451 PM

http:Nfoodpac.gatech.edu/fp-foodind

FOODPAC - The Food Industry in Georgia http://foodpac.g atec h.edu/@-foot!M.h

billion in 1990, a three-fold increase. In Georgia, growth in value of food shipments during this period outpaced the national rate, rising from $2.6 billion to $12 billion, almost a five-fold increase. (By comparison, the Consumer Price Index increased approximately three-fold in this period.)

Georgia’s food processing industry also has grown much faster than its farm industry. The value of shipments for the farm industry has risen from $0.59 billion in 1972 to $1.83 billion in 1990, a three-fold increase; when adjusted for inflation (as indicated by the Consumer Price Index), this figure really indicates a flat growth rate. Thus, in comparison with the nation and with the farm industry, Georgia’s food processing industry has grown at a much faster pace. This growth indicates the industry is healthy. In addition, its diversity in size, type, and geographic area makes it a significant contributor to Georgia’s economic stability.

petum to the FOODPAC Horn-

[ The Food Industry in Georgia I [ &&&& 1 I [ -tion Chad I

[ -1 I I I FoodPAC PublicatiQ[1S ] I [ ‘ I [ Office of Food Industry Programs ]

Authored by the Office of Food Industry Programs Georgia Tech Research Institute

Atlantr Georgia 30332-0537 USA Telephone: 401-594-341 2

Craig Wyvill. Director wwvvill@g&&&&& )

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

6 1998 GeorgiaTech Research Institute. All Rights Reserved.

Last Modified: Junr. 1998 URL: h(tp://foodpni~.lTnilech.edu

Make comments pertaining to this website to: Steven Thomas

2o f2

,)

9/14/98 4 5 1 PA\

http://foodpac.g

L Georgia Environmental Partnership L Pollution Prevention Assistance Division L Georgia Tech The University of Georgia

3

Pollution Pmvention Auirtance wvision. Georgia

osportment of

N-1 Resources

--\ The

Georgia Institute

of Technology, Economic

Development Institute

. IJ 'J

Georgia Environmental Partnership (GEP)

The GEP is comprised of the Pollution Prevention Assistance Division, the University of Georgia Department of Biological and Agricultural Engineering, and Georgia Tech's Economic Development Institute. Our goal is to provide services to Georgia manufacturers that will increase profits, efficiency, productivity, and competitiveness while decreasing waste generation, regulatory compliance problems, pollution control costs, disposal costs, and liability.

Pollution Prevention Assistance Division (PAD), Georgia Department of Natural Resources 0 P2AD is not EPD. 0 Provides confidential technical assistance 0

0

0

0

Goal is to reduce pollution by improving the efficiency of manufacturing processes No charge for services - fimded through your tax payments. Staff includes five engineers and four scientists Expertise in evaluating manufacturing processes to identify sources of waste and methods to reduce or eliminate waste.

Georgia Tech Economic Development Institute (EDI)

0

0

0

Expertise in energy systems, quality management, and manufacturing modernization Can help reduce energy cost and consumption Field offices throughout the state Can also provide regulatory compliance information and assistance

University of Georgia, Department of Biological and Agricultural Engineering (BAF,)

0

0

Expertise in food, pulp and paper, textiles, wood products, and agricultural processing Expertise in the recovery of waste materials, reducing water pollution, and water use reduction Provides on-site assistance and laboratory and pilot plant research and development

How do we work with our customers? 0 Confidentially Any reports that we do for you are your property.

e

0 On-site Assessments We will work with your staffto find sources of waste in your manufacturing and ofice operations, estimate the amount and value of waste, develop options for reducing, eliminating, or recycling waste, estimate the costhenefit of making process changes, and provide the information to you in a written report.

0 Technical Resource We will also work with you as a technical resource as part of process improvement teams.

Georgia Environmental Partnership Phone: 404 65 I 5 I20

7 Martin Luther King ]r Dr Suite 450 Atlanta, GA 30334 E-mail: [email protected] Fax: 404651 5130

mailto:[email protected]

0 Information Center We maintain a library of technical books and documents c " i n g many different types of manufacturing processes, case studies on successful pollution prevention technologies, and research papers. We can search our library, UGA, Georgia Tech, and Internet resources and send relevant information to you to aid in problem solving. 'I

0 Pollution Prevention Program Support We can help you set up and maintain a pollution prevention program. In addition, you can become part of our Pollution Prevention Partners program which provides for public recognition of your program add reduces certain environmental fees.

&me Definitions

0 Pollution Prevention Pollution prevention is eliminating waste before the waste is generated. Pollution prevention really means efficiency. Before waste can be eliminated and efficiency improved, the cause of waste production must be found. Identifying the cause of waste generation is not easy.

0 Waste Waste is any raw material or utility (water, electricity, natural gas, propane) that is used in a process that does not become part of the finished product. Waste is made up of materials that are purchased by the manufacturing plant. Recycling waste may recover a small amount of the value associated with the raw materials that make up a waste stream. Treatment and disposal of waste add cost. Eliminating waste at the source often reduces cost and improves environmental performance. Some typical sources of waste and waste reduction solutions are:

Sources of Waste Solutions

1

Compressed air systems Reduce energy use Eliminate leaks, improve thermal efficiency Optimize duty cycle

Maintenance painting Reduce pabt use Use HVLP paint guns Train painters Recover cleaning solvent

Parts washing Reduce water use Use counterflow rinsing Reuse water and cleaning solutions Use spray rinsing

Reduce Energy Use Agitate with blower air , not compressed air

Jancie Hatcher Information Manager [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

Georgia Pollution Prevention Assistance Division (P’AD)

What can $AD do for you?

PAD offers businesses, industries, and local and state government agencies technical assistance in developing and implementing pollution prevention. programs. Technical assistance is given in response to phone inquires, electronic communications, mail, workshops, seminars, and on-site visits. Assistance is free, confidential, and non- regulatory in nature.

Mission Statement

The mission of the Pollution Prevention Assistance Division is to develop programs and activities to facilitate reduction of pollution at the source, and instill a pollution prevention ethic which is consistent with the protection of human health and the environment.

PAD’S Services

The Division’s services include the following: Information Center - contains a library of over 3,300 documents, journal articles, and books pertaining to pollution prevention, recycling, and household hazardous waste. All documents have been abstracted and catalogued in a database. In addition to books and reports, the Center maintains more than 60 current periodical subscriptions and a collection of more than 80 videos. The Center also uses a wide variety of outside sources to research client questions, including the Georgia Tech and Georgia State University libraries, the Waste Reduction Resource Center in Raleigh, NC, the Internet, and national electronic listserves focused on pollution prevention.

On-site Assessments - non-regulatory visits to facilities in Georgia by P2AD engineers. A visit to your facility by Division engineers can provide new insight into improving efficiency and reducing waste in your operation. In working with small companies, a P2AD technical staff person performs an assessment to identify waste- generating processes and waste streams. For larger companies, P2AD acts as a facilitator to guide company managers in a self-assessment of their waste streams. The Georgia Tech Economic Development Institute and the University of Georgia’s Dept. of Biological and Agricultural Engineering personnel assist P2AD staff in performing assessments as needed. All information is confidential. After an assessment is made, a written report or fact sheet is provided to the company management offering options for pollution prevention, estimated waste reduction, and cost savings. A company is not required to implement any or all of the recommendations - their involvement is strictly voluntary.

Employee Training Sessions - These sessions provide training on-site for a cross

management, line workers). Division staff teach team building, how to do a self- assessment on waste streams, full cost accounting of waste, recognizing pollution prevention opportunities, etc.

section of the company’s employees (Le., environmental, financial, purchasing, upper )

Seminars and Workshops - P2AD, along with its many partners, sponsors seminars and workshops throughout the state on various pollution . prevention and waste reduction topics. Upcoming workshops are listed on the Division’s Web site and in its quarterly newsletter (see bottom of page for contact information).

Solid Waste Assistance - The Division has recently refocused some of its resources to address the issue of non-hazardous, industrial and commercial solid waste reduction. Along with a variety of partners, P2AD has identified five solid waste streams as the primary contributions from industrial and commercial sources to Georgia landfills. The five are: textile waste, constriction and demolition debris, wastewater sludges, wood, and food processing wastes. For each of these waste streams, P2AD is currently developing detailed waste characterizations, which will identify generators of the waste stream, existing market infrastructure, waste reduction strategies, and market development opportunities.

Agricultural Sector - The Division funds two full-time positions through the University of Georgia and the Cooperative Extension Program to focus on pollution prevention practices for the state’s agricultural industries. This program provides on- site visits, workshops, publications, newsletters, and a wide variety of other types of technical assistance. The program has developed Georgia Farm*A*Syst, a written, self-assessment tools for farmers to use in evaluating their environmental practices. The program is also involved in projects focusing on animal waste reduction and industrial by-product conversion.

)

Contact Information Jancie Hatcher, Information Manager 7 Martin Luther King, Jr. Drive Suite 450 Atlanta, GA 30334 (404) 651-5120 or (800) 685-2443

e-mail [email protected] Web http://w w w . gane t. org/dnr/p2ad

FAX (404) 65 1-5 130

mailto:[email protected]://w

Measuring Your Waste Stream by:

Dr. Bill Merka Poultry Science Department The University of Georgia

MEASURING YOUR WASTE STREAM

Bill iMerka Department of Poultry Science

University of Georgia Athens, Georgia

Determining Discharge Volumes

Flumes and weirs are structures made to a defined shape. By measuring the depth of flow at a designated measuring point, the volume of flow can be calculated based on a formula specific for that flume or weir.

-

I

The Equation to Determine Pounds of Material

Analytical Flow Volume (in gal) X 8.34 X Results =pounds 1,000,000 in Mg/h

Note: 1 gallon of water weighs 8.34 pounds

Why Measure the Waste Stream?

To determine the volume of water being discharged during specific periods of time To determine the amount of organics being discharged into the waste stream To determine the efficiency of pre-treatment systems To determine the amount of product being lost to the drain

Determining the Amount of Organics Discharged to the Waste Stream

Sampling Time Composite Flow Composite

.-

Examp le:

A plant flows 1 million gallons ofwaste water per day that has a total solids content of 2300 Mg/h. How many pounds of solids are discharged each day?

I

10.5 tons ofpoultry meal 63,000 Ib of chicken

f .

Loss of Profit Due to Degraded Product

Dried SPN (DAF

Pet food grade poultry skimmings) ............. si00/ton meal ..................... WOO/ton

value ..................... .. S300/ton Loss of p d u c t

S300/ton X 2.600 tons = S750,000/yr lost product value*

*Cost of recovery not included (f3O/dry ton SPN)

. . . . . - . ... . .

Workshop Notes:

I Measuring

Solid Waste Losses

A. Estes Reynolds Department of Food Science

and Technology University of Georgia

Athens, Georgia

Measuring Solid Waste Losses

I

Sources - Floor Losses -Machine Residues -Spoilage -Transfer Point

-Spillage -Machine Waste

Losses - Packaging Losses -Contamination

Losses


0 Data Collection (Continued) -Rework Data Sheet -Production Data Sheet -Receiving Data Sheet -Inventory Data Sheet


Product Measurements -Dry Weight -Yield Calculations -Material Balance

I

, i -1

I i

Measuring 1 Solid Waste Losses

Data Collection - Inedible Waste

- Floor Waste By

-Incidence - Pack Out Data

- Production Data-

-Clean UP crew - Pickup Spoilage

Area- Data Log Data LogjMachine

Report- Spillage Sheet

. - - - - . - - - -. - __ . _ _ - -_ -


0 Determine Total Input -Product Weight -Additive Weights

.Spices

.Salt 0 Ingredients


i 0 Determine Total Input (Continued)

-Water AddedJBatterlBreading -Fat Uptake -Packaging Weight (Casings)


0 Yield Calculations (Continued) 0 Compare

-Estimated Yield vs -Actual Packed Weight


0 Measurable Losses - Collect Data (Continued) -Discarded Ingredients

(BattedBreading) - Significant Spillage -Fat discarded -Packaging Losses


0 Yield Calculations

oSubtract -Total Product Input

-Cook LOSS Water Fat

-Rework -Measurable Losses

- - . --_ _. - ___ . _-__


0 Measurable Losses - Collect Data - ShrinWEvaporation Loss - Floor Loss -Machine LossNaste

Measuring Solid Waste Losses .

0 Calculate -Solid Waste - Unaccountable Loss


!

0 Determine Most Significant Losses 0

0 Chart Waste by Area 0

Chart Amounts in Each Category

Estimate Cost Losses by Category

! -~ . --


Determine Return on Investment for -Cost of Training -Cost of Maintenance

I -Cost of Investment

I


0 Apply Problem Solving Techniques Initiate Training Program

0 Involve Management 0 Keep RecorddCost

1 ___. . - . - - - - - - - --

. ,-

! * PRODUCT WASTE I

Accurate Accounting i of Product Losses !

A. Estes Reynolds Department of Food Science

and Technology

Athens, Georgia

I

University of Georgia ! I

i

Areas of Product Losses Transfer Points

Container Residual 0. Pipelines

Pumps Equipment Residues Packaging Adherence Over Fill Levels

- Conveyor belts, auger feeds, dumps. loading

I Loss Awareness ! 1

i Measure Floor Cases by Area ! Include Rework in Loss Calculations Measure Water Stream Losses Measure Materials DiscardedfI'rash

1 i i I ' I

Record Daily Waste Loss by Weight Past Losses by Area

I f

Amount of Product Loss

Solid Product 1 Ib = 1 Ib loss Soluble Solids -Milk 1 Ib BOD = 1 Gal iMilk -Chicken -Meat

1 Ib BOD = 1 Ib Dry Matter

1 Ib BOD = 3.25 Ib Chicken 1 Ib BOD = 2.00 Ib iMeat

Fat, Oil and Grease - Direct Loss Nitrogen Losses

-Volume X Concentration =Weight Loss

-1 Ib TKN = 31 Ib Chicken Meat

Areas of Product Losses (continued)

Deep Fat Fryers - Fat losses Bottles and Breading Equipment Culls, Damaged Products Grading, Down Grades Equipment Abuses Carelessness .-

Laboratory Analysis of Wastewater

by:

Dr. Egerton Whittle Feed & Environmental Water Laboratory

The University of Georgia

I

Wastewater Analysis Procedure Egerton Whittle, Ph. D.

Head, Feed and Environmental Water Laboratory

The following block of instruction will allow you to become familiar with methods of wastewater analysis. Using these procedures, you can gain valuable data about the strength of wastewater from your plant. Knowledge of time and sources of high strength wastewater discharge will allow you to develop a rational plan to reduce these wastewater strengths.

These procedures will also allow you to determine those times and conditions where your DAF system is losing effciency.

The official publication that defines procedures for the analysis of wastewater is “Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater.” It is published by the American Public Health Association. If you would like to become more familiar in laboratory analysis, this publication will give detailed instructions for each procedure.

There are several analysis that are of concern to wastewater treatment operators. These are:

1. Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) 2. Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) 3. Total Suspended Solids (TSS) 4. Solids

a. Total (TS) b. Volatile (VS) c. Fixed (FS) Fat, Oil, and Grease (FOG) 5 .

6. Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) 7. pH

1. Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) -

BOD measures the amount of oxygen that bacteria in the wastewater will require to break down the organic contaminants in the wastewater. This test is important because biological wstewater treatment systems are designed to remove organics from the wastewater. To design treatment systems properly, the amount of organics entering the system must be known.

From an environmental standpoint, if high organic strength wastewaters are discharged into a water course, (river, lake, pond, etc.) the bacteria will feed on the organic matter. In doing so, they can consume all of the oxygen dissolved in the water. When this happens, fish and other animals that remove oxygen from the water die of suffocation. This can happen rapidly, because relatively little oxygen will dissolve in water, only about 8 mg/L. When oxygen is depleted from the water, the bacteria that require oxygen (aerobes) take over. These bacteria do not break down the organics as completely as do aerobic bacteria. The aerobes produce toxic compounds such as ammonia and hydrogen sulfide. These compounds also have unpleasant odors. The typical “rotten egg” odor is hydrogen sulfide. When the oxygen is depleted from wastewater and the aerobes take over it is said to be septic.

3

-1

' I

The biochemical oxygen demand test is performed over a 5 day period, hence the notation (BOD,). The BOD, procedure measures the amount of oxygen dissolved in the wastewater at the beginning of the test. The wastewater is placed in a sealed bottle and incubated for 5 days at 20 degrees C. The amount of oxygen remaining in the wastewater after 5 days is measured. The difference in the two measurements is the amount of oxygen that the bacteria consumed.

100 - 10,000 mg/L. To measure these concentrations it is necessary to dilute the wastewater sample with water that has no BOD and then run the test.

diluted. If the wastewater strength is not known, then several dilutions are prepared.

Wastewater samples contain much more BOD than 5 mgL. BODS commonly range from

From previous experience, a technician will know how much the wastewater should be

EXAMPLE PROBLEM

A wastewater sample is diluted 1:250. At day 0 the DO is 8.0 mg/L. At day 5 he DO is 3.0 mgiL What is the BOD?

DO,, - DO, & dilution factor = BOD,

8.0 -3.0 x 250 = 1250mgLBOD,

2. Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD)

Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) is a rapid method of wastewater analysis to measure

The reagent responsible for the oxidation in this test is potassium dichromate. This the concentration of organics in the wastewater.

compound has an orange color. When wastewater containing organics is added and the reagents heated in a closed vial the dichromate ion os converted to the chromium ion in a direct proportion to amount of organic matter in the sample. The orange color of dichromate is converted color to the green color of the chromium ion. The degree of this color change is read in a spectrophotometer. The strength of the wastewater as mgL of COD has a high correlation to BOD. COD results are ready in 2 hours rather than 5 days.

3. Total Suspended Solids (TSS)

Total Suspended Solids is a procedure to determine the concentration of particulate matter in a wastewater. Suspended solids reduction is important in wastewater treatment because excessive solids block sunlight in a water course. They will also eventually settle out causing layers of sludge to form in an oxidation pond, lake, stream etc. More specific to food processing wastewater treatment, the particulate matter in wastewater is, after the major source of contaminants in a wastestream. For example, analysis of wastewater from poultry processing plants has shown that as much as 95 percent of the organics in evisceraton wastewater is in the

'J form os suspended solids.

To perform the TSS procedure, a measured volume of wastewater is filtered through a -> pre-weighed dried glass filter specified in Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater. The filter is then dried at 103 degrees. After drying, the filter is weighed. The weight that the filter gains is due to the solids that the filter has trapped. To perform this procedure the filter must be weighed an analytical balance that has the capability of weighing to 4 decimal places.

EXAMPLE CALCULATION

Filter + sample wt - filter wt

Volume of sample in mls x 1,000,000 = mgL of TSS

0.350 gms -0.250 gms

100 mls x 1,000,000 = 1,000 mg/L of TSS

EXAMPLE PROBLEM

] 75 mls of wastewater is filtered through a glass fiber filter that weighs 0.2554 grams. After drying, the filter weighs 0.2845 grams. What is the TSS?

4. Total Solids Analysis

The Total Solids (TS) procedure is similar to TSS as it is a drying and weighing

To perform the procedure, a measured volume of wastewater is delivered into a dry procedure. The calculations are the same as those used for TSS.

crucible. The details'of the equipment is defined in Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater.

The crucible and sample are dried at 103 degrees C until all the water is evaporated. This normally takes 12 - 24 hours. After the samples are dried, they are removed fiom the oven and placed in a dessicator to cool. This is a necessary step because hot material can not be accurately weighed on an analytical balance. The samples must be cooled in a dessicator to prevent the dried material from picking up moisture fiom the air as they cool.

EXAMPLE CALCULATION

wt of dry crucible + sample - dry crucible wt x 1,000,000 = mg/L TS

Volume of sample in mls (3

EXAMPLE PROBLEM

100 mls of wastewater are delivered into a dried crucible that weighs 62.7744 gms. After drying the crucible weights 63.0766 gms. How many mg/L of TS does this wastewater sample contain?

7

Total Solids can be expanded with an extra step that will give additional data that

This extra step is to take the weighed crucible with the dried sample and place it in a evaluates the wastewater.

muffle furnace which has the temperature set at 550 degrees C (1020 degrees F). At this temperature all of the organic matter in the sample will burn up in 30 minutes. Only the inorganic material (minerals in the wastewater) will remain.

After the samples have cooled in the dessicator, they are weighed in the same way that they were weighed for the TS procedure.

Data gained from this additional step will define the portion of the total solids were organic matter and inorganic matter (minerals). These are termed volatile and fixed solids.

5. Fat, Oil, and Grease Analysis (FOG)

*' 3

The amount of fat, oil, and grease (FOG) are important in wastewater treatment because excessive FOG can plug sewer lines, pumps, and clarifiers. Most municipalities receiving wastewater limit FOG concentrations to 100 mg/L to prevent these problems.

TS, FS, and VS.

butyl ether, to dissolve the FOG from the wastewater sample. The freon containing the dissolved FOG is then delivered into a weighed beaker and the fieon is evaporated in a drying oven. The FOG remains in the weighed beaker. The beaker containing the FOG is then cooled and weighed as in TSS, TS, FS and VS procedures.

The procedure to determine FOG is a procedure of weighing as in determination of TSS,

The procedure uses fieon, or more recently a combination of Hexane and methyl-tert-

EXAMPLE CALCULATION -

Beaker and FOG weight - beaker weight

Volume of sample x 1,000,000 = mg/L FOG

EXAMPLE PROBLEM

Freon containing the FOG extracted from 250 mls of wastewater is delivered into a beaker weighing 45.721 1 grams. After the freon was evaporated from the beaker, the beaker weighed 46.01 72 grams, What was the FOG concentration in this wastewater sample?

6. Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen Analysis (TKN) 7

Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) is an analytical procedure to determine the amount of organic nitrogenous materials in a wastewater sample. The name Kjeldahl is the name of the person the developed the procedure. It is not some special chemical form of nitrogen called KjeIdahl nitrogen.

Nitrogen in wastewater is important because it is a primary plant nutrient. When excess amounts of nitrogen are added to a water course, one-celled plants such as algae grow profusely. They can block sunlight. At night when there is no sunlight, these plants can rapidly consume the dissolved oxygen fiom a pond, lake, river, etc., and the animals that depend on dissolved oxygen in the water can suffocate. this excessive plant growth also fills lakes and ponds with plant material.

The TKN procedures use boiling sulfuric acid along with other chemicals to help speed the reaction. The wastewater is mixed with the Kjeldahl reagents and boiled at high temperatures. The nitrogenous compounds are converted to ammonium sulfate (NH,)2S0,. A strong base, sodium hydroxide, is added to increase the pH so that is highly basic. At a high pH, ammonium is very insoluble and is converted to ammonia gas which, is trapped and measured.

7. Wastewater Analysis for pH

pH is a measure of acidity or alkalinity of wastewater. A wastewater that is too acid can eat up tanks, sewers, pipes, pumps, etc., and destroy a wastewater treatment system. The low pH can also affect the efficiency of the bacteria in the wastewater treatment system. High pH is not as corrosive to systems but can effect the efficiency of bacteria in a wastewater treatment system. Municipalities receiving wastewater, generally limit the range of pH to 5.00 to 9.00.

pH is expressed in units of 10, therefore, a wastewater with a pH of 5.00 is 10 times more acidic than a wastewater with a pH of 6.00 and 100 times more acidic than a wastewater with a pH of 7.00. The range of pH is 0 - 14. A pH of 0 is completely acidic whereas a pH of 14 is completely basic. A wastewater with a pH of 7.00 is called neutral and is neither acidic nor basic.

sample and the pH is read directly on the meter scale. The procedure to determine pH is not difficult. A pH probe is placed into the wastewater

CORRELATION OF WMTEUATER TEST RESULTS

Egerton Whittle, Head Feed and Nutrition Laboratory The University of Georgia

Athens, GA 30602

William Merka Extension Poultry Scientist

Department of Poultry Science The University of Georgia

Athens, GA 30602

Biochemical oxygen demand (BOD,) is a standard analytical procedure to determine the concentration of organics in the waste stream of a food processing plant. This procedure is used to determine the waste load from processing plants to be used for design of either pre-treatment plants or for biological treatment plants. Municipalities use BOD,, as a parameter for wastewater strength discharged into municipal sewers and use BOD, as a parameter f o r regulatory compliance.

BOD, is, by definition, a five day analytical procedure. A processing plant can be out of compliance for more than a week, before the results of the’ previous week samples are known.

Analysis of poultry processing wastewater for BOD, and other methods of organics analysis, chemical oxygen demand (COD), total volatile solids (TVS) , and total suspended solids (TSS) , have shown a general relationship exists between these methods and BOD,. Since the other procedures produce results much more rapidly than BOD,, it would be valuable to predict BOD, based on its relationship to COD, TVS, 01: TSS.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

To establish these parameters, samples of three types of wastewater (from the primary off a1 screen, the feather screen,

274

and final plant effluent) prior to physical/chemical pretreatment were obtained from three different poultry processing plants. Grab samples were taken from the three

processing plants. on three separate days. wastewater sources .at nine (9) A.M. from each of three 1

Samples were transported within a short period of time t o the Agricultural Services Laboratory at the University of Georgia for analysis for BOD,, COD, TVS, and TSS. Prior to analyses for these four parameters, the grab samples were homogenized for 1.5 minutes using a Fisher Powergen homogenizer with a two (2) cm diameter generator. This was done to ensure homogenicity of the samples as particulate organics of substantial s i z e were observed in the original grab samples. All samples were analyzed for the four parameters using accepted procedures as described in “Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater.’

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

From data presented in Tables 1, 2 and 3 it is evident that large variations in wastewater strength occur from each of the three sources at any particular time during processing, this demonstrates that composite sampling over time is preferable to the grab type sampling employed in the present study. Composite sampling is sure to give a more accurate representation of waste stream strength.

From the data presented in Table 1, it would appear that the organic strength of wastewater from the primary offal screen is much less concentrated in plant #1 than is the waste water collected from the primary offal screens of plants 12 and #3. Although not addressed in this study, there are a number of possibilities for this outcome. Plant #1 may be putting less organics in the offal stream from the evisceration operation, they may be adding organics comparable to the other two plants but adding it to a greater volume of water, or the primary offal screen in plant fl may be more efficient at removing organics from the waste stream. Analysis of feather screen water presented in Table 2 reveals that the concentration of organics from this source is similar at plants I, 2, and 3.

Table 3 gives the results of the analyses of final plant effluent from plants 1, 2, and 3. While the organic strength of the effluent from all plants is comparable, there appears to be a substantial amount of variation within each of the three plants. Again, this may be the result of grab sampling rather than composite sampling.

275

'-3 TABLE 1. Characteristics of wastewater discharge from the primary offal screen at three broiler processing plants Meat BOD,* COD TVS TSS

P1

P1

P1

1 2563 4663 2349 1840

2 698 112 0 612 604

3 1842 2965 1544 1415

1701 2916 1502 1286

1 3714 6540 3255 2940

2 5013 7738 4000 3697 3 4987 7195 3296 2435

4571 7158 3517 3024

1 4115 6785 3747 4098

2 3815 6600 3194 3050

3 5165 9530 3772 3682

4365 7638 3571 3610 *mg/L

TABLE 2. Characteristics of wastewater discharge from the feather screen at three broiler processing plants

Feather BOD,* COD TVS TSS P1

P1

P1

1 2168 2 2467 3 4630

3088 - 1 1892 2 2142 3 3787

2607 1 2303 2 2185

-

3 2200

4550

3578

8290

2257

2001

3928

1753

1299 3160

5473 3065 3585

5845

2729 1561 1803 3041

2071 1367

1424 2400

4165 3833

5065 4513

2135 1953 2468

2052

1730 1541 1773

1568 2229 4470 2158 1627

*mg/L

276

TABLE 3. Characteristics of wastewater discharge from the final plant effluent flow at three broiler processing plants

%

FPE BOD, * COD TVS TSS P1 1 1 2930

2 1880 3 3300

2703 P1 2 1 2580

-

2 3020 3 4403

3334 -

P1 3 1 3220 2 2995

3 4420 -

4835 2460 5435

2340 1321 2538

2327 997 2170

4243 4295 4823 6668

2066 2434 2396 3201

1831 2160 1983 2000

5262 3315 3860

6018

3201 2898

2645

2218

- 2048 2490 2210

2032

2 5'8 7 3545 4464 -~ 2244 * W / L

Data on the ratios of COD, TVS, and TSS to BOD, in water taken at of fa1 screens is presented in Table 4. All of these ratios appear to show a fairly wide variability which serves to demonstrate that small samples, composited over time are likely to produce more consistent results and that variability seems to exist on a minute to minute basis within a given waste stream. This variation carries through with the data on feather screen water and final plant effluent presented in Tables 5 and 6. In addition to the variability between samples presented here, there is an inherent variability in all laboratory procedures, especially those such as BOD,, which depends on microbial activity for the analysis.

Table 7 shows the average ratios between various analytical procedures on each wastewater source from all of the plants examined. From the data presented in this table, it is evident that With a greater number of samples, BOD, may be more accurately predicted using parameters with a much shorter analytical time than BOD,. In the data presented here, the parameters of COD, TVS, and TSS were selected. It has been generally reported that the BOD, to COD ratio is between 0.5 and 0.6. The present study generally supports this, although f o r FPE (final plant effluent), a ratio of 0.65 was obtained. Perhaps as close as we can approximate the BOD, from COD data is that BOD, is probably between fifty and sixty-five percent

277 I

of COD. While this is not as close an approximation as would be desired, it may be as close as we can get. Some of the underlying reasons for this may be the amount of fat in the wastestream at any given time. Although not addressed in the present study, previous work at plant 2 demonstrated that as the amount of fat increased in a wastestream, the BOD, to COD ratio decreased, possibly because the microbes in the BOD, analysis digest fat with somewhat more difficulty.

3

TABLE 4. Ratios of COD, TVS, and TSS to BOD, in water from the primary offal screens in three broiler processing plants

COD : BOD, TVS : BOD, TSS : BOD,

Plant 1 1

2

3 7

Plant- 2

Plant 3

Range

1

2

3 - 1

2

3 -

1.82

1.60

1.61

. 92

.88

.84

. 72

.87

.79

1.68

1.76

1.54

1.44

.88

.88

.80

.66

.79

. 79

.74

.49

1.58

1.65

1.73

1.85

.78

091

.84

.73

. 66 1.00

. 80

.71

1.74

1.44-1.85

.83

. 66- . 92 -76

949-1.00

Table 8 shows the results of a single sampling of water from the evisceration wastestream at plant 2 . Untreated evisceration wastewater had a TVS and FOG of 1656 mg/L and 1628 mg/L respectively. This water had a BOD, to COD ratio of 0.39. After gravity separation, the TVS and FOG were reduced to 697 mg/L and 364 mg/L respectively. Therefore, the FOG to TVS ratio was reduced from almost 1.00 to about 0.50. The BOD5:COD ratio increased from 0.38 to 0.48, When this wastewater sample was chemically flocculated, TVS and FOG were reduced to 291 mg/L and 35 mg/L respectively for an FOG to TVS ratio of 0.12. The BOD, to COD ratio in this water was found t o be 0.55. '.

278

TABLE 5. Ratios of COD, TVS, and TSS to BOD, in water from the feather screen operation in three broiler processing plants -

COD : BOD, TVS:BOD, - TSS :BOD, Plant 1 1 2.10 1.04 -81

2 1.45 .ai 53

. 85 -68 .67

3 1.79 - 1.78 -90

Plant 2

Plant 3

Plant 2

Plant 3

a3 .72 1 1.62

2 3 1.54

. 66 .a0 -63

. 67 . 85 -67 1.13 .81

1.67 a4

- 1.61 . 83

1 1.66

2 2.32

3 2.05 093 071

.73 -

2.01 90 Range 1.45-2.32 -80-1.13 -53-.81

TABLE 6. Ratios of COD, TVS, and TSS to BOD, in water from the final plant effluent stream in three broiler processing plants

COD : BOD, TVS : BOD, TSS :BOD, Plant 1 1 1.65 . ao -79

2 1.31 -70 0 53

3 1.65 77 . 66 1.54 -76 -66

1 1.66 . 94 . 84 2 1.60 79 63

1.59 -82 64

-

3 1.51 . 73 .45 1 1.09 -90 77 2 1.96 . 88 074

-

3 1.36 -50 46

1.47 . 77 . 66 - Range 1.09-1.96 50-. 94 ,45-.84 279

”3 TABLE 7. Average ratios of analytical procedures from evisceration screen, feather screen, and final plant effluent (FPE) from three broiler processing plants

Evisceration Feather - FPE COD : BOD, 1.67 1.80 1.55 TVS : BOD, 0.83 0.90 0.77 TSS: BOD, 0.76 0.68 0.65 TSS : TVS 0.92 0.76 0.84

TABLE 8. Treatment of broiler processing evisceration wastewater by gravity separation or polymer flocculation.

COD - TVS - FOG Evisceration Wastewater 1524 3950 1656 1628 Gravity Separation 950 1945 697 3 64 % Reduction 38 50 58 78

&Qa -

Polymer Floculation 325 593 291 3 5

“g/L Reduction 79 85 82 98

CONCLUSIONS

From data presented in this paper, it is evident that both the concentration and characteristics of components of a wastestream vary constantly. Examination of the wastestream should be based on multiple composited sampling rather than from grab sampling.

The present study demonstrates that BOD, may be generally predicted from parameters which have the advantage of a shorter analytical t h e frame, The parameters utilized in this study were COD, TVS, and TSS. It must be stressed that, as shown here, a wide variability exists between different plants and that, in order to increase the accuracy of prediction, a substantial number of samples specific to a particular plant should be taken before confidence may be given to the predicted ratio.

Analysis of TVS to FOG ratios in a single sample of evisceration wastewater suggests that the FOG to TVS ratio may affect the BOD, to COD ratio. Additional data should be collected to confirm this observation, - -

280

. REF-CES

Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater. 18th Ed. (1992), APHA. Washington, D.C.

Merka, W.C. , 1990. . A characterization of wastewaters discharged by a modern broiler processing plant. Final report, Project 355, Southeastern Poultry and Egg Assn., Decatur, GA.

281

Section 5: Waste Water Analytics

This section of the manual will look at five different types of waste water analytics. Laboratory methods will be discussed along with technical information for each type of andysis. Although it will be difficult to become experts in all areas presented, good competance can be obtained in the analysis of Bichemical Oxyzen Demand (BOD), Chemical Oxysen Demand (COD), and Total Suspenden Solids (TSS), and Total Volatile Solids (TVS).

and flow data, a systematic plan can be developed to help minimizz and promote efficient discharge of waste.

By knowing the characteristics of wastewater, along with the time. location of discharge,

Part A: Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD)

BOD is a measure of the biodegradeable organic constituents of a wastenmx stream. It is obtained by measurement of the amount of oxygen reguired by bacteria in the process of breaking down theses constituents (ie oxygen demand). %hen organic componds are discharged into a water stream aerobic microorganisms digest the organics. During this digestion process, the microorganisms consume dissolved oxygen in the water. When the digestion proctss uses the dissolved oxygen more rapidly than it can be reprenished , oxygen is depleted from the water supply. As the oxygen levels diminish, bacteria requiring oxygen, or aerobics, die off and bacteria that do not require oxygen, or anaerobics, take over. With all off the dissolved osygen in the water depkted, aquatic life such as fish and other animals begin to die from oxygen starvation.

microorganism> to digest the organics in the water. The test is performed by mzasuring the inital concentration of dissolved oxygen in a wastewater sample and and incubating the sample at 20°C for five days in a sealed bottle. The diffemce in the day 0 Dissolved Oxygen (DO,) and Day 5 Dissolved Oxygen (DO,) concentration is the amount of oxygen consumed and is called the BOD5 Sample And Storage of Samples:

Iower BOD values. To minimize reduction of BOD, the samples need to be kept near-freezing during storage, and analyzed as soon as possible. When takins grab samples cold storage is not necasary if the sample is analysed within two hours of sampling. If analysis is not started within two hours, keep sample at or below 4'C from the time of collection, and begin analysis within 6

The BOD test was developed to determine the amount of oxygen required by the aerobic

Bod samples may degrade quickly between the time of sampleing and anaIysis, resulting in

hours of collection. When taking composite samples, compositing, and limit composite period to 24 hours. criteria for storage as that of the grab samples. Test Procedures: Dilution Water:

Fill LC-Boy with 10 liters deionized water and

keep samples at or below 4OC during After composite sampling, follow the same

add and trace minerd buffer packet to water. Saturate with dissolved oxygen by aerating with organic free filtered air, or store in cotton plugged bottle long enough for water to become saturated. Also, this is a good time to add seed to the water if needed in performing the BOD test.

31

._ .-. . --. Section 5 continued:

. dippamtues:

The Bod test uses special 300ml BOD bottles with ground glass stoppers and plastic caps. , Make sure bottles are cleaned with a detergent, rinsed thoroughly, and drained before use. Use a I black marker pen and label the bottles for idenification of its contents. Also have several 500mI and IOOOml graduated cylinders clean and ready for the dilution process.

Sample Pretreatment:

needs to be between 6.5 to 7.5, and can be nzutrdized with a solution of Sulfuric Acid (H-SO,) or Sodium Hydroxide (NaOH), as long as the reagent does not dilutr: the sampie by more than 0.5%. Also be sure the temperature of the wastewater is 20k:I°C before making dilution.

It is important to check the pH of che wastewater before dilution. The pH of the sampIe

Dilution Technique:

Dissolved Oxygen uptake of at least 2 mg/l. after a 5 day incubation period. When preparing dilutions it is extremely helpful to have an idea of the expected BOD. This can be accomplished by running a COD test, and assume BOD to be one-half of the COD. This will provide a good starting point in performing the BOD test. Once BOD have been run a relationship between BOD and COD for a specific process can be developed to provide more accurate results. If no COD results are avaiable, then several dilutioons of prepared sample can be made to obtain a DO uptakz in the above mentioned range.

There are several variations on makrng dilutions, however the one presznted will involve using a graduated cylinder and dilutions in units of ten. A one in ten (1 : 10) dilution would consisL3 of 1OOml of sample’and 900 mlof dilution water. A 1 in 100 dilution ( 1 : l O O ) would be 10 d of sample and 990 mi of dilution water. By using a systematic format in makrng dilutions, there is less confusion and less chance of error, Once dilutions are made in the graduated cylinder mix well with a plunger type mixing rod, and avoid entraining air. After dilution has been mixed, slowly poor into the 300 ml BOD bottle and fill to the top, measure initial Dissolved Oxygen, Stopper tightly, water seal, place plastic cover over stopper, and incubate for 5 days at 20’C. Be sure to record the initial Dissolved Oxygen of all dilutions of the wastewater sample.

As a rule, dilutions need to result in a residua1 Dissolved Oxygen ofsat least 1 mg/I and a

i

Blank and Control:

BOD bottle with plain seeded dilution water, measure initial Dissolved Oxygen, stopper, water seal, cover with plastic cover cap, and incubate for 5 days.

Whether using seeded or unseeded dilution water a “ControI” Bod bottle or Glucose- glutamic acid check needs to be made. A control consists of a mixture of 150 mg glucose/Iiter and 150 mg glutamic acidfliter as a standard check. Determine the 5 day 20’C BOD of a 2% dilution of the control using the procedure outiined above, and it should yield 200+37 ppm BOD.

If using seeded dilution water, it’s important to have a “blank” BOD bottle. Fill a 300ml

32

When dilution water is seeded:

: P

Where: D, = DO of diluted sample immediately after preparation, mg/L D, = DO of diluted sample after 5 day incubation period at 2OoC, mg/X P = decimal volumetric fraction of sample used, B, = DO of seed control before incubation, mg/L Bz = DO of seed control after incubation, mgL

Example Problems: F-J

DO, -3 DO- Dilution Factor -> BOD-

* 5.2 - 250 750 8.2 1. 2. 8.2 3. 8.2

5. 8.2

2400 3.4 500 1,000 5700 2.5

220 3.3 250 1225

4. 8.2 6.0 100

Example 1: BOD, mg/L = 8.2 - 5.2 = 750 mg/L .004

or

Example 1: BOD, mg/L = (8.2 - 5.2)x250 = 750 mg/L

33 !! ii

Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) By: Dr. Tim Kelley, Department of Biology, Nevins Hall, Vddosta State University

Purpose: -Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) is a measurement used to determine the organic load of wastewaters using biochemicd methodolgy. -Wastewater, when released into the environment, or into municipal waste treatment systems, contains organic contaminants that are used by aerobic microorganisms and deplete available dissolved oxygen in the water, whch may kill fish or other aquatic organisms that requite oxygen to survive, or mayoverload municipal water treatment plants. -By incubating a wastewater sample with appropriate "seed" microorganisms for a spzcfic amount of time (usually 5 days), and determing the Dissolved Oxygen (DO) before and after incubation, a measure of the organic load of this wastewater can be determined. -Monitoring of the BOD of wastewater gives information about the type of 'wastewatzr Senerated, and how it may potentially be reduced.

Material Needed: -Fresh wastewater samples. -Type I reagent water (for dilutions if necessary.) -Clean, 250-300ml BOD bottles with tops. - "Seed" micoorganisms (obtained from scientic supply house.) -Dissolved oxygen (DO) meter with probe. Incubator (20~1'C.)

-

Methods: -Approximate the BOD, of the sample and determine appropriate dilutions to obtain a range of about 3-3 mg/L with Type I reagent water. For Example, if your approximated BOD is 1500-2000 mgL, your dilution factor would be 1500 (1500-2000/500 = 3-5mgL.) -If you cannot approximate your BOD, you can either use a COD analysis to first approximate the BOD, or run several dilutions concurrently (e.g., l : l O , 1:100, 1500, etc.) -All analyses sholud be conducted triplicate. -Add "seed" to each bottle in the same amount and concentration (in dilution water if used.) Add water samples to be tested to BOD bottles until sample reaches the top. Reseed samples if necessary. -Determine initial dissolved oxygen levels using calibrated DO meter and probe. -Incubate samples for 5 days at 2Q+loC. -Determine final di'ssovled oxygen levels.

34

. Calculation of BOD,:

-CaIcualte BOD, by using the following formula: .7> BOD5, m@= (D, - DJ X P Where:

D, = Initial DO of sample D2 = Final DO of sample P = Dilution factor (e&, 500)

-If using dilution water, it is useful to analyze the dilution water concurrently as a control to confirm the dilution water is not contributing significantly to BOD.

Example #I:

A sample of wastewater with an unknown BOD was diluted l : l O , 1:100, and 1:500 for analysis.

Results: 1 : l O dilution - DO, (initid) = 8.4 mgL, DO, (final) = 0.1 mg/L 1:lOO dilution - DO, (initial) = 8.3 mSL, DO, (final) = 0.3 mg/L 5) 1500 dilution - DO, (initial) = 8.4 mgL, DO, (final) = 4.4 mg/L Calculations:

(8.4 mg/L - 4.4 mg/L) = 4.0 mg/L x 500 = 2,000 mg/L BOD -

Example #2:

A sample with an approximate COD of 4,000 mg/L was diluted 1500. COD is usually higher than BOD. A typical C0D:BOD ratio for plant effluents is 2:l. To determine BOD from COD, divide COD by two. Approximated BOD = 4,000 mb/L/2 = 2,000mgL

Results: DO0 (initial) = 8.2 mgL, DO5 (final) = 4.7 mg/L

Calculations :

8.2 mg/L - 4.7 m g L = 3.5 mg/L x 500 = 1750 mgL BOD

35

Chemical Oxvgen Demand ICOD):

Chemical oxygen Demand (COD) is a rapid method, only 2 hours, of determining the concentration of organics in a waste stream. For samples from a specific source, a relationship 1 between COD and BOD can be developed, and provides usesful for monitoring the waste streau,, after the correlation has been made. The COD test is based on using an oxidizing agent, Potassium Dichromate, sulfuric acid and catalysts (mercuric chloride and silver chloride) to chemically oxidize the organic matter. As the organic is oxidized the orange dichromate ion is reduced to the D oreen chromium ion. The amount of organic matter oxidized is in proportion to the reduction of dichromate to chromium ion. Tne color change is measurd in a colorimeter or a spectrophotometer and expressed on a scale as mg/L COD.

A COD test takes less than three hours, and is used extensivley to estimate the BODS of a wastewater sample. A rule of thum when estimateing BOD5, is to assume a ratio of 2:l BOD5 to COD. By divideing the COD by 2 a close approximation of BODS can be made. However tests need to be run on both BOD5 and COD to check the correctness of this ratio.

Procedure:

The wastewater sample needs to be analysed as soon as possible after sampling possible to provide accurate results. It is a good idea to follow the same handling and storage procedues outlined for BOD when doing a COD test. Most COD tests are run using pre filled COD vials, that are available from several suppliers. Each vial requires 2ml of sample, and typically a dilution has to be preformed on the orginal sample of waste water. For example a 2 dilution would be I d of dionized water and one ml of the wastewater, and you mulitply the final result by 2. A 4 dilutic would be 1&1/2 ml of dionized water and YZ ml of wastewater, and you would multipIy the fins results from the colorimeter by a factor of 4. Stepsto Follow:

1. Label COD vials with appropiate dilution and name. 2. Thourghly mix wastewater sample. 3. Place required amount of DI water and waste sample accordin, 0 to dilution. 4. Replace plastic cap and shake vial compltely. 5. Place vial in heating block, preheated to 15OoC (32OoF), for two hours. 6. Calibratae colorimeter with blank, and then measure sample for COD in mgL. 7. Record data.

36

. * . CHEiMICAL 0,YYGEN DEMAND (COD) .

By: Dr. Tim Kelley, Department of Biology, Nevins Hall, Valdosta State University 3 Purpose: -Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) is another measurement used to quickly (2-3 hours) determine the organic load wastewaters using a chemical digestion technique. -Wastewater, when released into the environment, or into municipal waste treatment systems, contains organic contaminants that are used by aerobic microorganisms and deplete available dissolved oxygen in the water, which may kill fish or other aquatic organisms that require oxygen to survive, or mayoverload municipal water treatment plants. -By using a chemical oxidant (Chromic Acid) to oxidize the organic components of the wastewater at high temperatures, and relating the rate of reduction an indicator to color changes, the amount of - or&& matter can be determined. -Monitoring the COD of wastewater provides a quick, easy method for estimating the organic load of wastewater generated, and how it can be decreased.

Materials Needed: -Fresh wastewater samples. -Type I reagent water (for blanks.) -Test tubes (screw-cap.) -Heating block (to fit above test tubes.) -Block heater or oven (150 & 2OC.) -Standard potassium dichromate sulfuric acid digestion solution. -Spectrophometer ( 6 O O n m to fit above test tubes.)

-> =

Methods: -Measure a suitable volume of sample and reagents into clean test tubes. -Digest samples and blank at 150 -Cool samples, read absobance at 600nm using spectrophotometer. -Compare absorbance to previously determined calibration curve, or read COD directly using COD spectrophotometer.

2OC for 2 hours.

'Note: A typical C0D:BOD ratio for plant effluent is 2:l (to determine BOD from COD, divide COD by two).

37

Example: A wastewater sample is analyzed for COD. A spectrophometer is used sei at 600 nm to read absorbance of the cooled, digested sample.

Results: The absorbance read is .45.

COD determination: Use attached calibration curve to compare an absorbance of .45 to previously established absorbance of standard samples (absorbance of .45 = COD of approximately 850 ma.)

I

References: Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 17th edition. 1989. L. Clesceri, A. Greenbug, R. Trussel, Eds. American Public Health Association, American Water Works Association, Water Pollution Control Federation. Washington, DC.

Proceedings, 1994 National Poultry Waste Symposium. J.P. Blake, J.O. Donald, P.H. Patterson, Eds. Published by National Poultry Waste Management Symposium Committce. Auburn University Printing Service, Auburn, Alabama.

COD CaIibration Curve COD (mgL) = 1.41 +(ABS x 1,858)

i

1,100

1,000

900

800

COD 700 * g L , 600

500

400

300

200

100

F

0.100 0.200 0.300 0.400 0.500 0.600 0.000

AB S 0 RB AN C E (600NM) . .

38

Total Suspended SoIids:

TotaI Suspended SoIids (TSS) is a procedure to measure the concentration of particulate '3 matter in a waste stream. Solids analyses are important in the control of biological and physical characteristics in a waswater stream and for determing compliance with regulatory agencies for effluent dicharge limits. The TSS concentration is determined by filtering a well mixed sample through a weighed glass fiber filter and the residue retained on the filter is dried to a constant weight at 103 to 105'C for one to two hours. The increase in weight represents the total suspended solids.

Procedure:

Insert a preweighed 70mm glass fiber filter with the wrinled side up into the filtration apparatus. The filtration apparatus consist of a asperator bottle, Butner funnel, and a ventrui tube to

- provide suction on the filter. Wash down the filter with approximateiy 20-ml of dionized water to make sure the filter is seated on the funnel. hfeasure a well mixed wastewater sample into a 3 oraduated cylinder, and then slowly pour the mixed sample onto the glass fiber filter. Once all of the sample has been poured through the filter, wash down inside of graduatzd cylinder and pour the wash water through the filter. Wash down the sides of the funnel with 10 to 20 ml of dionized water, to make sure all of the sample has passed through the filter. Carefully remove the filter, and place on aluminum or stainless steel planchet for support. Place filter and support in a drying oven for 1 to 2 hours at 103 to 105OC. After the given time period, remove filter and allow to dry in a 2 desiccator to balance temperature. Once the filter has cooled, reweigh and record. The weight picked up by the filter is the amount of particulate matter removed from the wastewater.

Example:

One hundred mls of wastewater was passed through a glass fiber filter that preweighed at 0.2500 0 orams. The filter was dried and allowed to cool and reweighed at 0.3000 grams. What was the TSS (mgc) of the wastewater sample?

Filter + sample weight - Filter weight x 1,000,000 = m g L TSS m l s of wastewater sample.

0.3000 - 0.2500 x 1,000,000 = 500mglL 1 OOmls

39

Total Volatile SoIids (TVS):

Total Volatile Solids (TVS) measures the concentration of organic matter in watsewater sample. The results can be obtained in 24 hours. TVS has an advantage over BOD,and COD, becuase larger samples of wastewater can be used. BOD, is Iimited to 2 to 4 d s of wastewater COD is limited to 2mls. Often times it is difficult to accurately sample wastewater with such a small amount. The sample of TVS is only Iimited to the size of crucible used for the analysis.

1

Procedure:

TVS concentrations are determined by delivering a measured volume of wastewater into a preweighed clay crucible. The crucibIe and sample are dried to dryness at 103'C for 12 to 24 hoks. The crucible is allowed to cool in deciccator and then weighed. It is then ashed in a muffle furnace at 550°C until the organic matter is burned, usually about 30 minutes. The crucible is the cooled and reweighed. The weight lost in the ashing process is the amount of organic matter in the wastewater sample.

Example Problem:

One hundred mls of wastewater sample was poured into a cIay crucible and then was dried for 24 hours at 103°C, and allowed to cool. After cooling the weight 3f the dried crucible and sample was 62.1922 gms. The sample was then ashed in a muffle furnace for 30 minutes, and allowed to cool. The weight of the crucible and sample was now 62.1244. What was the TVS m g L

Dried Weizht (gms). - Ashed Weight (gms) x 1,000,000 = TVS mg/l Volume of sample (mls)

Dried crucible + sample = 62.1922 Ashed crucible + sample = 62.1244 sample volume = 1OOmls

62.1922 - 62.1244 x 1,000,000 = 678 m g L TVS 100 m I s

40

Block 3.

Lesson 1. Wastewater Analysis Procedures

This block of instruction will allow you to become familar with methods of wastewater analysis. In one day's intruction it will be difficult to become skilled laboratory analysts. You can however, become skilled in COD, TSS, and solids determination. Using these three procedures, you can gain valuable data about the strength of wastewater from your plant. Knowledge of time and sources of high strength wastewater discharge will allow you to develop a rational plan to reduce these wastewater strengths. These three procedures will also allow you to determine those times and conditions where your DAF system is loosing efficiency.

analysis of wastewater is "Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater**. It is published by the American Public Health Association.

If you would like to become more skilled in laboratory analysis, this publication will give detailed instructions for each procedure.

There are several analysis that are of concern to wastewater treatment operators. These are:

7,

The offical publication that defines procedures for the

1. 2. 3 . 4 .

I.2 5 . 6 . 7 . 8 .

Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) Total Suspended Solids (TSS) Solids a. Total (TS) b. Volatile (VS) c. Fixed (FS) Fat, Oil and Grease (FOG) Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) Ammonia (NH3) PH

During todays lessons, each will be discussed and each student will be given the opportunity to perform or observe each procedure.

1. Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD)

BOD measures the amount of oxygen that bacteria in the wastewater will require to break down the organic contaminants in the wastewater. This test is important because biological wastewater treatment systems are designed to remove organics from the wastewater. To design treatment systems properly, the amount of organics entering the system must be known.

From an environmental standpoint, if high organic strenth wastewater are discharged into a water course, (river, lake, pond, etc.) the bacteria will feed on the organic matter. In doing so, they can consume all of the oxygen dissolved in the water. When this happens, fish and other animals that remove oxygen from the

1 1~ 2

water die of suffocation. This can happen rapidly, because relatively little oxygen Will dissolve in water, only about 8 mg/L. When oxygen is depleted from the water, the bacteria that require oxygen (aerobes) die off and bacteria that do not require

the organics as completly as do aerobic bacteria. The anerobes produce toxic compounds such as ammonia and hydrogen sulfide. These compounds also have unpleasant odors. The typical "rotten egg" odor is hydrogen sulfide. When the oxygen is depleted from wastewater and the anerobes take over it is said to be septic.

The equipment that is associated with biological wastewater treatment is designed to add oxygen to the wastewater faster than the aerobic bacteria can use it. That is one purpose of the floating aerators. They are adding oxygen back to the wastewater.

The biochemical oxygen demand test is performed over a 5 day period, hence the notation (BOD5). The BOD5 procedure measures the amount of oxygen dissolved in the wastewater at the beginning of the test. The wastewater is placed in a sealed bottle and incubated for 5 days at 20 degrees C. The amount of oxygen remaining in the wastewater after 5 days is measured. The difference in the two measurements is the amount of oxygen that the bacteria consumed.

oxygen (anerobes) take over. These bacteria do not break down )

Dissolved Oxygen at Day 0 - Dissolved oxygen at day 5 = amount consumed

Wastewater samples contain much more BOD than 5 mg/L. BODS commonly range from 100 - 10,000 mg/L. To measure these concentrations it is necessary to dilute the wastewater sample with water that has no BOD and then run the test.

From previous experience, a technician will know how much the wastewater should be diluted. If the wastewater strength is not known, then several dilutions are prepared.

EXAMPLE PROBLEM

A wastewater sample is diluted 1:250. At Day 0 the DO is

& dilution factor = BOD5 E8 I ?8 x 250 = 1250 mg/L BOD^ 8.0 mg/L. At day 5 the DO is 3.0 mg/L. What is the BOD?

aste

2. Chemical Oxygen Demand

Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) is a rapid method of c ater analysis to measure the condentration of organics in the wastewater.

dichromate. This compound has an orange color. Other compounds The reagent responsible for this test is potassium

\ I

such as sulfuric acid, mercuric sulfate and silver sulfate are mixed with the potassium dichromate to speed the reaction. When wastewater containing organics is added and the reagents heated in a closed vial the dichromate ion is converted to the chromium ion in a direct proportion to amount of organic matter in the sample. The orange color of dichormate is converted color to the green color of the chromimum ion. The degree of this color change is read in a spectrophotometer. The strength of the wastewater as mg/L of COD has a high correlation to BOD. COD results are ready in 2 hours rather then 5 days.

The rapid vial method for COD will measure COD only as high as 1500 mg/L. Many food processing wastewaters exceed this. A dilution of 1:5 is Usually sufficient to measure COD; however, some wastestreams exceed this. It is sometimes necessary to dilute the sample as high as 1:50 to get a proper result.

3 . Total Suspended Solids (TSS)

Total Suspended Solids is a procedure to determine the concentration of particulate matter in a wastewater. Suspended solids reduction is important in wastewater treatment because excessive solids block sunlight in a water course. They will also eventualy settle out causing layers of sludge to form in an oxidation pond, lake, stream etc. More specific to food processing wasteater treatment, the particulate matter in wastewater is many times the major source of contaminants in a wastestream. For example, analysis of wastewater from poultry processing plants has shown that as much as 95 percent of the organics in evisceraton wastewater is in the form of suspended solids. These solids are due to small fat and tissue particles. Suspended solids analysis 'can also be a valueable tool in selecting a pretreatment method. In a wastestream, if suspended solids is a minor portion of the contaminant load, then the remaining portion of the load is soluble. Many times floculation will not effectively remove solubles from the wastestream. If a plant has a high solubles load, then installaion of a chemical foculation system will be a waste of money.

To perform the TSS procedure, a measured volume of wastewater is filtered through a pre-weighed dried glass filter specified in Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater. The filter is then dried at 103 degrees. After drying the filter is weighed. The weight that the filter gaines is due to the solids that the filter trapped. To perform this procdure the filter must be weighed an analytical balance that has the capability of weighing to 4 decimal places.

..3 3

Example Calculation

Filter + sample wt - filter wt Volume of sample in mls

x 1,000,000 =mg/L of TSS ..............................

0.350 gms - .250 gms .................... x 1,000,000 = 1000 mg/L of TSS 100 mls

SAMPLE PROBLEM

75 mls of wastewater is filtered through a glass fiber filter that weights 0.2554 grams. After drying, the filter weights 0.2845 grams. What is the TSS?

Lesson 2. Laboratory Analysis of Wastewater Practical Exercise

The class is divided into 2 groups of students. Instructors will assist students in the procedures for BOD5, COD and TSS analysis.

4

Lesson 3 . Wastewater Analysis Procedures

analytical procedures for Solids (TS), Fat, Oil and Grease ( F O G ) , Total Kjelahl Nitrogen (TKN) and pH.

During this lesson, you will become familar with the

Total Solids Analysis

During the previous lesson, you learned the procedure to determine the amount of particular matter in a wastewater sample. Total solids (TS) is an analytical procedure to determine the total amount of matter in a wastewater sample. The procedure is similiar to TSS as it is a drying and weighing procedure. the calculations are the same as those used for TSS.

To perform the procedure, a measured volume of wastewater is delivered into a dry crucible. The details of the equipment is defined in Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater.

until all the water is evaporated. The normally takes 12-24 hours. The drying time is affected by the type of drying oven used and the nmber of samples put into the drying oven at one time. After the samples are dried, they are removed from the oven and placed in a dessicator to cool. This is a necessary step because hot material can not be accurately weighed on an analytical balance. If hot materials are placed in an analyrical balance, the hot material cause air currents to form in the balance and the sample will not be weighed accurately. The samples must be cooled in a dessicator to prevent the dried material from picking up moisture from the air as they cool.

After the crucibles cool in the dessicator, (this usually take 30 minutes to 1 hour), the crucibles are removed from the dessicator, one at a time and weighed.

The lid shduld be kept on the dessicator to prevent moist air from entering the dessicator.

The crucible and sample are dried at 103 degrees c

1-J

EXAMPLE PROBLEM

wt of dry crucible + sample - dry crucible wt x 1,000,000 = mg/L TS ..............................................

Value of sample in mls

SAMPLE PROBLEM

100 mls of wastewater is delivered into a dried crucible that weights 62.7744 gms. After drying the crucible weights 63.0766gms How many mg/L of TS does this wastewater sample contain?

1

This test can be expanded with an extra step that will give additional data that evaluates the wastestream.

This extra step is to take the weighed crucible with the dried sample and place it in a muffle furnance which has the temperature set at 550 degrees C (1020 degrees F). At this temperature all of the organic matter in the sample will burn up in 30 minutes. Only the inorganic material (minerals in the water) will remain. After the sample has ashed, it is removed from the muffle furnance and cooled in the 103 degrees C oven for about 30 minutes. The sample is then removed from the 103 degree oven and placed in the dessicator and cooled to room temperature. The samples should not be taken directly from the muffle furnance to the dessicator because the 1000 degrees F crucible will heat the air inside the dessicator and can build up enough pressure to pop the lid off the dessicator and break it. Dessicators cost $200 - 300; it is costly to break them in this way.

After the samples have cooled in the dessicator, they are weighed in the same way that they were weighed for the TS procedure.

Data gained from this additional step will define the protion of the total solids were organic matter and inorganic matter (minerals) .

EXAMPLE PROBLEM

Wt of ashed crucible - crucible wt x 1,000,000 = mg/L of fixed solids - 68.9341 x 1,000,000 = 64 mg/L FS

To determine the amount of organic matter subtract the FS from the TS. I I

TS - FS = Volatile solids (VS) 386 - 64 = 322 mg/L The concentration of volatile solids (VS) has a high

correlation to BOD.

Fat, Oil and Grease Analysis. (FOG)

The amount of fat, oils and grease (FOG) are important in wastewater treatment because excessive FOG can plug sewer line, pumps, clarifiers. Most municipalities receiving wastewater limit FOG concentrations to 100 mg/L to prevent these problems.

The procedure to determine FOG is a procedure of weighing as in determination of TSS, TS, FS and VS. Details of the procdure are stated in Standard Method for the Examination of Water and Wastewater. However, this procedure is rather complicated and probably will take more time and effort than a wastewater treatment operator has.

The procedure uses freon to dissolve the FOG from the wastewater sample. The freon containing the dissolved FOG is then delivered into a weighed beaker and the freon is evaporated in a drying oven. The FOG remains in the weighed beaker. The

2

beaker containing the FOG is then cooled and weighed as in TSS, TS, FS and VS procedures.

EXAMPLE PROBLEM

Beaker and FOG weight - beaker weight / volume of sample x 1,000,000 =: mg/L FOG

SAMPLE PROBLEM

Freon containing the FOG extracted from 250 mls of wastewater is delivered into a beaker weighing 45.7211 grams. After the freon was evaporated from the beaker, the beaker weighed 46.0172grams. What was the FOG concentration in this wastewater sample?

Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen Analysis (TKN)

Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) is an analytical procedure to determine the amount of nitrogenous materials in a wastewater sample. The name Kjeldahl is the name of the person that developed the procedure. It is not some special chemical form of nitrogen called Kjeldahl nitrogen.

Nitrogen in wastewater is important because is a primary plant nutrient. When excess amounts of nitrogen are added to a water course, one-celled plants such a algea grow profusly. They can block sunlight. At night when there is no sunlight, these plants can rapidly consume the dissolved oxygen from a pond, lake, river etc. and the animals that depend on dissoved oxygen in the wa

p2infohouse.orgi” 1998 food processors conference: lncreasing your profits & lmproving your yield...

Documents