BUILDING A WORLD OF DIFFERENCE®

TS002: Secondary Phosphorus Removal

A New Approach to Biological

Phosphorus Removal
J. Barnard, D. Houweling, H. Analla, M. Steichen

WEFTEC 2010
 WEFTEC 2010

Overview
 Introduction
 Overview of unconventional phosphorus removal
 Fermentation of RAS for phosphorus removal
 Fermentation of mixed liquor for phosphorus
removal
 Models must simulate all observations
 Summary

TS002: Secondary Phosphorus Removal

 WEFTEC 2010

Phostrip Process - 1965

TS002: Secondary Phosphorus Removal

 WEFTEC 2010

Anaerobic zone formed at

inlet end of aeration
Inefficient aeration and
basin high oxygen demand
responsible

In the late 60’s phosphorus removal was observed in high rate plug-flow
plants that did not nitrify. Milbury noted that all such plants showed a
release of phosphorus at the feed end
TS002: Secondary Phosphorus Removal
 WEFTEC 2010

Bardenpho Pilot plant (100 m3/d)

The purpose of the dead zone was to allow

relative adjustments to the other zones.

TS002: Secondary Phosphorus Removal

WEFTEC 2010

TS002: Secondary Phosphorus Removal

 WEFTEC 2010

Static Fermenter

Anoxic
PS
T
anaerobic

Optional
recycle VFA

to digesters
TS002: Secondary Phosphorus Removal
 WEFTEC 2010

Switching off Aerators - Disneyworld

Reedy Creek, Florida

6

4
Total P, mg/L

First Few
3
Aerators Turned Off

0
Oct- Jun- Fe b- Fe b- Oct-
78 80 82 84 85

TS002: Secondary Phosphorus Removal

 WEFTEC 2010

US Patent 5,603,833 POH process 1995

Several patents

Claim required a retention time of 12 to 72 hours in Stressed Zone

but does not refer to sludge settling. Reference to a side-stream
process for reduction of nitrates in the RAS.

TS002: Secondary Phosphorus Removal

 WEFTEC 2010

Configuration proposed by Stroud et al for

achieving both nitrogen and phosphorus removal

4Q

Influent Effluent
AX AER AX AER

Bardenpho plant

Ferment AN AX WAS

RAS Fermentation

TS002: Secondary Phosphorus Removal

 WEFTEC 2010

Conversion from Pho-strip to Phoredox

with RAS fermentation

Influent
Wastewater
Effluent
Settling
Anaerobic Aerated
Influent Wasted
Wastewater 0.85 RAS Biomass
Effluent 0.15 RAS

Aerated Settling Fermenter

Return Biomass
Lime

Stripper

Return Biomass
Wasted
Lime Biomass
Sludge

TS002: Secondary Phosphorus Removal

 WEFTEC 2010

Configuration used by Vollertsen for BPR

Influent
Effluent
Anox/Aerobic
93%
Anaerobic
zone
7% Return activated sludge

The main reactor consisted of channel systems for SND. 7% of the

RAS was passed to a sidestream anaerobic zone with long retention.
Note that VFA in the feed was lost for enhancing phosphorus
removal

TS002: Secondary Phosphorus Removal

 WEFTEC 2010

BPR Operation at St Cloud MN

Under-aeration

TS002: Secondary Phosphorus Removal

 WEFTEC 2010

Effluent Quality for the St Cloud MN plant

2009 Effluent Nutrients in mg/L

Eff CBOD5 Eff. TP TKN EFF NH3 EFF

30.0

25.0

20.0

15.0

10.0

5.0

0.0
1/1/2009

2/1/2009

3/1/2009

4/1/2009

5/1/2009

6/1/2009

7/1/2009

8/1/2009

9/1/2009

10/1/2009

11/1/2009

12/1/2009
TS002: Secondary Phosphorus Removal
 WEFTEC 2010

Mixed liquor Fermentation at Pinery Water

Influent
RAS
Anaerobic Anaerobic Phosphorus reduced form
9 mg/L to less than 0.5
mg/L , then with post

Aerobic
chemical treatment to less
OFF ON than 0.03 mg/L. Overall
molar ratio to Al:P is 0.5

Anoxic

TS002: Secondary Phosphorus Removal

 WEFTEC 2010

Mixed liquor Fermentation at Henderson NV

TS002: Secondary Phosphorus Removal

 WEFTEC 2010
Carousel Plant Henderson NV

TS002: Secondary Phosphorus Removal

 Phosphorus (mg/L)
5/
1/

0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
2
5/ 010
2/
2
5/ 010
3/
2
5/ 010
4/
2
5/ 010
5/
2
5/ 010
6/
2
5/ 010
7/
2
5/ 010
8/
2
5/ 010
9/
5/ 201
10 0
/
5/ 201
11 0
5/ / 201
WEFTEC 2010

12 0
/
5/ 201
13 0
/
5/ 201
ANA Eft

14 0
5/ / 201
15 0
/
5/ 201
16 0
SPS

5/ / 201
17 0
/
Results from Henderson NV

5/ 201
18 0
/
5/ 201
Ortho-P for May 2010
SCC

19 0
5/ / 201
20 0
/
5/ 201
21 0
/
5/ 201

TS002: Secondary Phosphorus Removal

22 0
Final Eft

5/ / 201
23 0
/
5/ 201
24 0
/
5/ 201
25 0
5/ / 201
26 0
/
5/ 201
27 0
5/ / 201
28 0
/
5/ 201
29 0
/
5/ 201
30 0
/2
01
0
 WEFTEC 2010

Surface appearance of Henderson Plant

During mixing

Some hours after mixer off

TS002: Secondary Phosphorus Removal

 WEFTEC 2010

Fermenting Mixed Liquor

Mixed Liquor In Mixed Liquor Out

Mixed Liquor

PAO VFA
PAO
VFA PAO
Heterotrophes

PAO PAO

In the mixed liquor fermenter, the PAO survive – the OHO are
fermented to produce VFA
Barnard presentation Krakow 2007

TS002: Secondary Phosphorus Removal

 WEFTEC 2010

MJHB – UMIF Strategy

We propose that this be formalized in

design to create an upflow mixed liquor
fermenter attached to the anaerobic zone

TS002: Secondary Phosphorus Removal

 WEFTEC 2010

Application to Henderson plant

TS002: Secondary Phosphorus Removal

 WEFTEC 2010

What have we learned?

 Phosphorus removal with unconventional processes can give reliable

results
 Mostly such phosphorus removal happened by manipulation or full-scale
experimentation and not by design
 There are too many unknowns for a lawyer-free design
 Role of nitrates
 Role of influent rbCOD
 Solids retention time under fermentation
 Portion of the mixed liquor that can be fermented
 Temperature

TS002: Secondary Phosphorus Removal

 WEFTEC 2010

What is needed

 A better understanding of mechanisms at play

 Optimizing the configuration
 Consider side stream fermentation of mixed liquor
as opposed to RAS
 Remove the chance aspect and have more control
 Model the performance of these plants in order to
design with confidence

TS002: Secondary Phosphorus Removal

 WEFTEC 2010

Challenge to the Proprietors of Simulation Models

 Efforts to model unusual phosphorus removal

configurations were at first, not successful
 It may be necessary to change the basic structure
of models to allow for the survival of the PAO
 Attend follow up paper on Wednesday by Dwight
Houweling for discussion on model application

TS002: Secondary Phosphorus Removal

 WEFTEC 2010

Modeling the pilot plant flow diagram

TS002: Secondary Phosphorus Removal

 WEFTEC 2010

Conclusion

 Plants with some form of internal fermentation of mixed liquor or RAS

can result in reliable biological phosphorus removal – There seems to
be consensus that less than 10% of the return sludge should be
fermented.
 Plants that do not remove phosphorus reliably can be improved by
manipulating aeration
 Future designs should optimize the configuration to make maximum use
of internal fermentation of mixed liquor
 Fermentation of mixed liquor as opposed to RAS seem to be superior
especially in plants with no primaries
 Efforts are under way to establish if UMIF can replace primary sludge
fermenters or allow the products to be used for denitrification.

TS002: Secondary Phosphorus Removal

WEFTEC 2010

TS002: Secondary Phosphorus Removal