Jose Porro

Balancing effluent quality, economic cost and greenhouse gas emissions during the evaluation of (plant-wide) control/operational strategies in WWTPs.

The objective of this paper was to show the potential additional insight that result from adding greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to plant performance evaluation criteria, such as effluent quality (EQI) and operational cost (OCI) indices, when evaluating (plant-wide) control/operational strategies in wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs). The proposed GHG evaluation is based on a set of comprehensive dynamic models that estimate the most significant potential on-site and off-site sources of CO₂, CH₄ and N₂O. The study calculates and discusses the changes in EQI, OCI and the emission of GHGs as a consequence of varying the following four process variables: (i) the set point of aeration control in the activated sludge section; (ii) the removal efficiency of total suspended solids (TSS) in the primary clarifier; (iii) the temperature in the anaerobic digester; and (iv) the control of the flow of anaerobic digester supernatants coming from sludge treatment. Based upon the assumptions built into the model structures, simulation results highlight the potential undesirable effects of increased GHG production when carrying out local energy optimization of the aeration system in the activated sludge section and energy recovery from the AD. Although off-site CO₂ emissions may decrease, the effect is counterbalanced by increased N₂O emissions, especially since N₂O has a 300-fold stronger greenhouse effect than CO₂. The reported results emphasize the importance and usefulness of using multiple evaluation criteria to compare and evaluate (plant-wide) control strategies in a WWTP for more informed operational decision making.

Multi-point monitoring of nitrous oxide emissions in three full-scale conventional activated sludge tanks in Europe

The large global warming potential of nitrous oxide (N2O) is currently of general concern for the water industry, especially in view of a new regulatory framework concerning the carbon footprint of water resource recovery facilities (WRRFs). N2O can be generated through different biological pathways and from different treatment steps of a WRRF. The use of generic emission factors (EF) for quantifying the emissions of WRRFs is discouraged. This is due to the number of different factors that can affect how much, when and where N2O is emitted from WRRFs. The spatial and temporal variability of three WRRFs in Europe using comparable technologies is presented. An economically feasible and user-friendly method for accounting for the contribution of anoxic zones via direct gas emission measurements was proven. The investigation provided new insights into the contribution from the anoxic zones versus the aerobic zones of biological WRRF tanks and proved the unsuitability of the use of a single EF for the three WRRFs. Dedicated campaigns for N2O emissions assessment are to be advised. However, similarities in the EF magnitude can be found considering treatment strategy and influent water composition.