You are on page 1of 23

ReportCode:003_GBP_IIT_EQP_S&R_02_Ver1_Dec2010

SewageTreatmentinClassITowns:
RecommendationsandGuidelines

ReportCode:003_GBP_IIT_EQP_S&R_02_Ver1_Dec2010

Preface

In exercise of the powers conferred by subsections (1) and (3) of Section 3 of the
Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 (29 of 1986), the Central Government has
constituted National Ganga River Basin Authority (NGRBA) as a planning, financing,
monitoring and coordinating authority for strengthening the collective efforts of the
CentralandStateGovernmentforeffectiveabatementofpollutionandconservationof
the river Ganga. One of the important functions of the NGRBA is to prepare and
implementaGangaRiverBasin:EnvironmentManagementPlan(GRBEMP).

AConsortiumof7IndianInstituteofTechnology(IIT)hasbeengiventheresponsibility
of preparing Ganga River Basin: Environment Management Plan (GRB EMP) by the
Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF), GOI, New Delhi. Memorandum of
Agreement (MoA) has been signed between 7 IITs (Bombay, Delhi, Guwahati, Kanpur,
Kharagpur,MadrasandRoorkee)andMoEFforthispurposeonJuly6,2010.

This report is one of the many reports prepared by IITs to describe the strategy,
information, methodology, analysis and suggestions and recommendations in
developing Ganga River Basin: Environment Management Plan (GRB EMP). The overall
FrameWorkfordocumentationofGRBEMPandIndexingofReportsispresentedonthe
insidecoverpage.

TherearetwoaspectstothedevelopmentofGRBEMP.Dedicatedpeoplespenthours
discussingconcerns,issuesandpotentialsolutionstoproblems.Thisdedicationleadsto
the preparation of reports that hope to articulate the outcome of the dialog in a way
that is useful. Many people contributed to the preparation of this report directly or
indirectly.Thisreportisthereforetrulyacollectiveeffortthatreflectsthecooperationof
many, particularly those who are members of the IIT Team. Lists of persons who are
membersoftheconcernedthematicgroupsandthosewhohavetakenleadinpreparing
thisreportaregivenonthereverseside.

DrVinodTare
ProfessorandCoordinator
DevelopmentofGRBEMP
IITKanpur

2|P a g e

ReportCode:003_GBP_IIT_EQP_S&R_02_Ver1_Dec2010

TheTeam

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19 .
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.

AAKazmi,IITRoorkee
AKGupta,IITKharagpur
AKMittal,IITDelhi

AKNema,IITDelhi

AjayKalmhad,IITGuwahati
AnirbanGupta,BESUShibpur
ArunKumar,IITDelhi

GJChakrapani,IITRoorkkee
GazalaHabib,IITDelhi
HimanshuJoshi,IITRoorkee
InduMehrotra,IITRoorkee
IMMishra,IITRoorkee
LigyPhilip,IITMadras

MMGhangrekar,IITKharagpur
MukeshDoble,IITBombay

PKSingh,ITBHU
PurnenduBose,IITKanpur
RRaviKrishna,IITMadras
RakeshKumar,NEERINagpur
SMShivnagendra,IITMadras
SaumyenGuha,IITKanpur
ShyamRAsolekar,IITBombay
SudhaGoel,IITKharagpur
SuparnaMukherjee,IITBombay
TRSreekrishanan,IITDelhi
VinodTare,IITKanpur

VivekKumar,IITRoorkee

kazmifce@iitr.ernet.in
akgupta18@rediffmail.com,akgupta@iitkgp.ac.in
akmittal@civil.iitd.ernet.in
aknema@gmail.com
kajay@iitg.ernet.in
guptaanirban@hotmail.com
arunku@civil.iitd.ac.in
gjcurfes@iitr.ernet.in
gazalahabib@gmail.com
himanshujoshi58@gmail.com
indumfce@iitr.ernet.in
imishfch@iitr.ernet.in
ligy@iitm.ac.in
ghangrekar@civil.iitkgp.ernet.in
mukeshd@iitm.ac.in
dr_pksingh1@rediffmail.com
pbose@iitk.ac.in
rrk@iitm.ac.in
r_kumar@neeri.res.in
snagendra@iitm.ac.in
sguha@iitk.ac.in
asolekar@iitb.ac.in
sudhagoel@civil.iitkgp.ernet.in
mitras@iitb.ac.in
sree@dbeb.iitd.ac.in
vinod@iitk.ac.in
vivekfpt@iitr.ernet.in

LeadPersons
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.

VinodTare,IITKanpur
LigyPhilip,IITMadras
AAKazmi,IITRoorkee
PurnenduBose,IITKanpur
ArvindKNema,IITDelhi
AtulMittal,IITDelhi
ArunKumar,IITDelhi
InduMehrotra,IITRoorkee
SubrataHait,IITKanpur

3|P a g e

ReportCode:003_GBP_IIT_EQP_S&R_02_Ver1_Dec2010

Contents

SNo.
PageNo.
1
General
5
2
SelectionofAppropriateSewageTreatmentTechnology
5
3
TreatmentChain
6
4
CostofTreatmentandLandRequirement
7
5
DecisionMatrix..
7
6
SludgeManagement..
13
7
FlowMeasurement.
13
8
BioassayTest
13
9
References
16
AppendixI.ExhibitsonOptionsforSecondaryTreatment 17

4|P a g e

ReportCode:003_GBP_IIT_EQP_S&R_02_Ver1_Dec2010

1. General
Sewage is a major point source of pollution. The target of Nirmal Dhara i.e. unpolluted
flowcanbeachievedifdischargeofpollutantsintheriverchanneliscompletelystopped.
Also,sewagecanbeviewedasasourceofwaterthatcanbeusedforvariousbeneficialuses
includinggroundwaterrechargethroughsurfacestorageoftreatedwaterand/orrain/flood
waterinanunlinedreservoir.ThismayalsohelpachievingAviralDhara.
Inordertoreducesubstantialexpenditureonlongdistanceconveyanceofsewageaswellas
treated water for recycling, decentralized treatment of sewage is advisable. As a good
practice,manysmallsewagetreatmentplants(STP)shouldbebuiltratherthanafewofvery
largecapacity.Allnewdevelopmentsmustbuildinwaterrecyclingandzeroliquiddischarge
systems. Fresh water intake should be restricted only to direct humancontact beneficial
uses of water. For all other uses properly treated sewage/wastewater should be used
wherever sufficient quantity of sewage is available as source water for such purposes. All
newcommunitysanitationsystemsmustadoptrecyclingoftreatedwaterforflushingand
completely isolate fecal matter until it is converted into safe and usable organic manure.
The concept of decentralized treatment systems and water/wastewater management will
becoveredindetailinsubsequentreports.

2. SelectionofAppropriateSewageTreatmentTechnology
Item4.5.2inGuidelinesforthePreparationofUrbanRiverManagementPlan(URMP)forall
Class I Towns in Ganga River Basin (Report No. 002_GBP_IIT_EQP_S&R_01) concerns with
sewage treatment plant. One of the most challenging aspects of a sustainable sewage
treatmentsystem(eithercentralizedordecentralized)designistheanalysisandselectionof
the treatment processes and technologies capable of meeting the requirements. The
processistobeselectedbasedonrequiredqualityoftreatedwater.Whiletreatmentcosts
areimportant,otherfactorsshouldalsobegivendueconsideration.Forinstance,effluent
quality,processcomplexity,processreliability,environmentalissuesandlandrequirements
shouldbeevaluatedandweightedagainstcostconsiderations.Importantconsiderationsfor
selectionofsewagetreatmentprocessesaregiveninTable1.

Table1:SewageTreatmentProcessSelectionConsiderations
Consideration
QualityofTreatedSewage
Powerrequirement
Landrequired
CapitalCostofPlant
Operation&Maintenancecosts
Maintenancerequirement
Operatorattention
Reliability
ResourceRecovery
LoadFluctuations

5|P a g e

Goal
Productionoftreatedwaterofstipulatedqualitywithoutinterruption
Reduceenergyconsumption
Minimizelandrequirement
Optimumutilizationofcapital
Lowerrecurringexpenditure
Simpleandreliable
Easytounderstandprocedures
Consistentdeliveryoftreatedsewage
Productionofqualitywaterandmanure
Withstandvariationsinorganicandhydraulicloads

ReportCode::003_GBP_IIT_EQ
QP_S&R_02_Ver1_Dec2010

3. Trreatmen
ntChain
n
Allsewagetreatmentplants shouldfollo
owaprocesschaindeependingup
ponthetecchnology
eatmentisttobedonee inthreesttagesas
chosen andthetreatmentcaapacity.Inggeneral,tre
pertheflowsheetpresentedinFigure1..

Figure
e1: Proce
essChainfo
orSewageTTreatment

Specificcationsandtreatmentobjectivesaateachstaggeoftreatm
mentareasfollows.

StageI PreliminaryyTreatmentt:
5mmbarraacks(before
epumping)
a)ThreeeStageScreeening:25

12
2mmbarraacks

5mmmesh(<2mmme
eshforMem
mbraneBioReactor,M
MBR)
hamberiffo
ollowingun
nitoperationisaerobiccandNorm
malGritChaamberif
b)AeraatedGritCh
followin
ngunitoperationisanaerobic.

nt:
Expecteedeffluentqualityafteerpreliminarytreatmen
Noffloatingmaterialsinclu
udingpolyth
henebags,ssmallpouch
hes,etc.
Propercollectio
onanddisp
posalofscreeeningandgrit.

StageIIIPrimaryan
nd/orSecon
ndaryTreattment:Man
nyoptionsaareavailableforsecon
ndstage
treatmeent.Theseoptionscan
nbegroupeedintofollo
owingthreecategories.
a) Pon
ndBasedSyystemsor
b) Acttivated Slud
dge Processs (ASP) and
d its Modifications or equivalentt systems in
ncluding
butt not limiteed to SBR, UASB follo
owed by ASSP, ASP operated on Extended Aeration
A
mo
ode(EAASP
P),ASPwithBiologicalN
NutrientRe
emoval(ASP
P+BNR),and
dMBBRor
c) MeembraneBio
oReactor(M
MBR)

6|P a g e

ReportCode:003_GBP_IIT_EQP_S&R_02_Ver1_Dec2010

Expectedeffluentqualityafterprimaryandsecondarytreatment:
BOD<30mg/L
SS<20mg/L
Nitrifiedeffluent
A brief description of various technological options available for secondary treatment are
presented in Appendix I. EAASP, ASP+BNR are considered to be variations of ASP and
producemoreorlesssamequalityeffluent(particularlywhentertiarytreatmentisadopted
after secondary treatment) and have approximately same treatment plant footprint. The
treatment cost is also of the same order and hence are not considered to be distinctly
differentthanASP.
Stage III Tertiary Treatment: Coagulationflocculationsettling followed by filtration and
disinfection is generally recommended. Other processes could be selected on the basis of
landavailability,costconsiderations,O&Mcost,reuseoption,compatibilityissuesincaseof
upgradation of existing plants, etc. However, disinfection operation should invariable be
included.Expectedeffluentqualityaftertertiarytreatment:
BOD<10mg/L
SS<5mg/L
Phosphate<0.5mg/L
MPNoffecalcoliforms<10/100mL
Where sewage flows are low and/or land can be spared without compromising on other
developmentalobjectivesoragriculture,wastestabilizationpondsfollowedbyconstructed
wetlandcanbeadoptedwithoutcoagulationflocculationsettling.

4. CostofTreatmentandLandRequirement
Comprehensive analysis of capital cost, operation and maintenance costs, reinvestment
cost, energy cost and land requirement based on data obtained from various STPs in the
GangariverbasinandelsewhereinIndiahasbeendone.Thisanalysishasbeensummarized
in Figure 2 as linkage between the treatment cost (`/KL as in 2010) and the required
footprintofthetreatmentplant(m2/MLD)forvarioussuggestedtechnologicaloptions.Fora
particulardesiredeffluentquality,thetechnologicaloptionwithhighertreatmentcostwill
generallyrequirelowertreatmentplantfootprint,andviceversa.

5. DecisionMatrix
Theselectionofaprocessrequiresanalysisofallfactors,notjusttreatmentcosts.Inorder
to provide additional factors for the final considerations, key parameters need to be
evaluated and weighed as shown in the Exhibit 1 to reach a final recommendation. The
matrix attributes are ranked as Low, Medium, High and Very High recognizing that
differences between processes are relative, and often, the result of commonly accepted
observations.ThecolumnentitledTypicalCapacityRangeisaddedtoillustratetherange
in which the treatment plants based on specific processes have been built so far in the
7|P a g e

ReportCode:003_GBP_IIT_EQP_S&R_02_Ver1_Dec2010

country should not be construed as showing technological limitations, nor to affirm that
plants outside that range do not exist. The ranges simply indicate most frequently found
sizes. A comparison of treatment costs and evaluation of various technologies for sewage
treatmentinIndiaispresentedinTable2.
In general it is accepted worldwide that the technologies which are deemed to be
appropriatehavetobequalifiedthroughapplicationofarigorousframeworkunderscoring
the performance expectations as well as the choice should be concurrent with the socio
economicacceptability.
27
24
21

TreatmentCost,`/kL

18
15
12

8
6
4
2
0
0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

5700

6000

6300

Treatment Plant Footprint, m2 / MLD


For Treatment Capacity < 5 MLD:
ASP

EA - ASP

UASB + ASP

SBR

ASP + BNR

MBBR

MBR

WSP

For Treatment Capacity > 100 MLD:


ASP

EA - ASP

UASB + ASP

SBR

ASP + BNR

MBBR

MBR

WSP

12

TreatmentuptoTertiaryLevel

TreatmentCost,`/kL

10

TreatmentuptoSecondaryLevel
ASP
MBBR
SBR
UASB+EA
MBR
WSP

0
0

500

1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 5500 6000 6500
2

TreatmentPlantFootprint,m /MLD

Figure2:

8|P a g e

TreatmentCost(asin2010)andCorrespondingPlantFootprintforvarious
SecondaryTreatmentOptions

ReportCode:003_GBP_IIT_EQP_S&R_02_Ver1_Dec2010

Table2:ComparisonofTreatmentCostsofVariousTechnologiesforSewageTreatmentinIndia

S.No.
1.0
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
2.0
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
3.0
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
4.0

AssessmentParameter/Technology
PerformanceafterSecondaryTreatment
EffluentBOD,mg/L
EffluentSS,mg/L
Faecalcoliformremoval,logunit
TNRemovalEfficiency,%
PerformanceAfterTertiaryTreatment
EffluentBOD,mg/L
EffluentSS,mg/L
EffluentNH3N,mg/L
EffluentTP,mg/L
EffluentTotalColiforms,MPN/100mL
Capitalcost
AverageCapitalCost(SecondaryTreatment),`.Lacs/MLD
AverageCapitalCost(TertiaryTreatment), `.Lacs/MLD
TotalCapitalCost(Secondary+Tertiary)`.Lacs/MLD
CivilWorks,%oftotalcapitalcosts
E&MWorks,%oftotalcapitalcosts
AreaRequirements
AverageArea,m2 perMLD

4.1

SecondaryTreatment+SecondarySludgeHandling

ASP*,a

MBBR*,c

SBR*,a

UASB+EA*,b

MBR*,a

WSP**,b

<20
<30
upto2<3
1020

<30
<30
upto2<3
1020

<10
<10
upto3<4
7080

<20
<30
upto2<3
1020

<5
<5
upto5<6
7080

<40
<100
upto2<3
1020

<10
<5
<1
<0.5
10

<10
<5
<1
<0.5
10

<10
<5
<1
<0.5
10

<10
<5
<1
<0.5
10

<10
<5
<1
<0.5
10

<10
<5
<1
<0.5
10

68.00
40.00
108.00
60.00
40.00

68.00
40.00
108.00
40.00
60.00

75.00
40.00
115.00
30.00
70.00

68.00
40.00
108.00
65.00
35.00

300.00
300.00
20.00
80.00

23.00
40.00
63.00
90.00
10.00

900.00

450.00

450.00

1000.00

450.00

6000.00

100.00

100.00

100.00

100.00

0.00

100.00

1000.00

550.00

550.00

1100.00

450.00

6100.00

AverageArea,m perMLD

4.2

TertiaryTreatment+TertiarySludgeHandling
2

TotalArea,m perMLD

4.3

Secondary+TertiaryTreatment

SludgeTreatment:*Thickener+Centrifuge;**Drying
a

ProcessType: Aerobic; AnaerobicAerobic; Anoxic/AnaerobicAerobic

9|P a g e

ReportCode:003_GBP_IIT_EQP_S&R_02_Ver1_Dec2010

S.No. AssessmentParameter/Technology
5.0
Operation&MaintenanceCosts
5.1 EnergyCosts(PerMLD)
5.1.1
5.1.2
5.1.3
5.1.4

Avg.TechnologyPowerRequirement,kWh/d/MLD
SecondaryTreatment+SecondarySludgeHandling

Avg.TechnologyPowerRequirement,kWh/d/MLD
TertiaryTreatment+TertiarySludgeHandling

Avg.NonTechnologyPowerReq.,kWh/d/MLD
SecondaryTreatment

Avg.NonTechnologyPowerReq.,kWh/d/MLD
TertiaryTreatment

5.1.5 TotalDailyPowerRequirement(avg.),kWh/d/MLD
DailyPowerCost(@`6.0perKWh),`./MLD/h
5.1.6
(IncludingStandbypowercost)

5.1.7 YearlyPowerCost,`.lacspa/MLD

ASP*,a

MBBR*,c

SBR*,a

UASB+ASP*,b

MBR*,a

WSP**,b

180.00

220.00

150.00

120.00

300.00

2.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

4.50

2.50

2.50

4.50

2.50

2.50

0.20

0.20

0.20

0.20

185.70

223.70

153.70

125.70

302.50

5.70

46.43

55.93

38.43

31.43

75.93

1.43

4.07

4.90

3.37

2.75

6.65

0.49

3.00
1.00
1.94
0.43
2.38

3.00
1.00
1.30
0.65
1.94

3.00
1.00
1.04
0.81
1.84

3.00
1.00
2.11
0.38
2.48

3.00
1.00
1.70
0.06
1.76

0.40

0.40

0.40

0.40

0.00

4.00

4.00

2.00

5.00

6.00

0.90
5.30

0.90
5.30

0.90
3.30

0.90
6.30

1.20
7.20

3.60
3.60
8.64
7.20
5.04
28.08
14.04
42.12
629.26

3.60
3.60
5.76
4.80
2.88
20.64
10.32
30.96
638.11

3.60
3.60
4.32
3.60
2.16
17.28
8.64
25.92
451.22

3.60
3.60
8.64
7.20
5.04
28.08
14.04
42.12
618.96

3.60
3.60
4.32
1.20
8.64
21.36
10.68
32.04
504.86

0.20

5.2 Repairscost(PerMLD)
5.2.1
5.2.2
5.2.3
5.2.4
5.2.5

CivilWorksperAnnum,as%ofCivilWorksCost
E&MWorks,as%ofE&MWorksCost
CivilWorksMaintenance,`.Lacspa/MLD
E&MWorksMaintenance,`.Lacspa/MLD
Annualrepairscosts,`.Lacspa/MLD

5.3 ChemicalCost(PerMLD)
5.3.1
5.3.2

RecurringChemical/PolymerCosts,`.Lacspa/MLD
SecondaryTreatment

RecurringChemical,`.Lacspa/MLD
(Alum,Chlorine,Polymer)Costs,TertiaryTreatment

5.3.3 OtherChemicalCost,`.Lacspa/MLD
5.3.4 TotalChemicalCost,`.Lacspa/MLD

5.4 ManpowerCost(Assuming50MLD Plant)


5.4.1
5.4.2
5.4.3
5.4.4
5.4.5
5.4.6
5.4.7
5.4.8
5.4.9

Manager,`.pa(1No.)
Chemist/Engineer,`.pa(1No.)
Operators,`.Pa(@`.12000pm)
Skilledtechnicians,`.pa(@`.10000pm)
Unskilledpersonnel,`.pa(@`.7000pm)
TotalSalaryCosts,`.Lacspa
Benefits(50%oftotalsalary),`.Lacspa
Salary+Benefits,`.Lacspa
TotalannualO&Mcosts,`.Lacspa

10|P a g e

832.55

ReportCode:003_GBP_IIT_EQP_S&R_02_Ver1_Dec2010

S.No.
6.0
7.0
7.1
7.2
7.3
7.4

AssessmentParameter/Technology
NPV(2010)ofCapital+O&MCostfor15years,`.Lacs
Present(2010)TreatmentCost,paisa/L
AverageCapitalCost,`.Lacs/MLD
uptoSecondaryTreatment
YearlyPowerCost,`.lacspa/MLD
uptoSecondaryTreatment
AnnualRepairsCost,`.Lacspa/MLD
uptoSecondaryTreatment
AnnualChemicalCost,`Lacspa/MLD
uptoSecondaryTreatment
ManpowerCost,`. Lacspa
for50mldplantuptosecondarytreatment

7.5 TotalAnnualO&MCosts,`.Lacspa
uptoSecondaryTreatment
`.Lacs
NPV(2010)ofCapital+O&MCostfor15years,
7.6
uptoSecondaryTreatment
7.7 Present(2010)TreatmentCost,paisa/L
uptoSecondaryTreatment

ASP*,a
14838.92
0.54

MBBR*,c
14971.67
0.55

SBR*,a
12518.32
0.46

UASB+EA*,b
14684.42
0.54

MBR*,a
27488.27
1.00

WSP**,b
10722.96
0.39

68.00

68.00

75.00

68.00

23.00

4.04

4.87

3.34

2.73

0.10

1.50

1.22

1.16

1.56

1.11

0.85

0.85

0.85

0.85

0.60

33.70

24.77

20.74

33.70

25.63

353.02

372.11

288.15

290.72

116.09

8695.35

8981.58

8072.24

7760.85

2891.39

0.32

0.33

0.29

0.28

0.11

SludgeTreatment:*Thickener+Centrifuge;**Drying
a

ProcessType: Aerobic; AnaerobicAerobic; Anoxic/AnaerobicAerobic


1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.

ASP

NoSludgeDryingBeds.Howevercanbeprovidedtocater25%of
sludgedewateringunderemergencyconditions
NoFPUafterUASB,onlyExtendedAeration(EAProcess)
UASBnotRecommendedforinfluentSO4>25mg/L
NoBiologicalPhosphorusRemoval,Coagulantsarenecessary
NoEnergyRecoverysystemrecommendedonlyifBOD<250mg/L
Lessthan5hHRTMBBRisnotacceptable
Lessthan14hHRTSBRisnotacceptableforplantswithpeakfactor
2.5
Repair+Chemical+ManpowerCostofMBRis`.500Lacper50MLD

:ActivatedSludgeProcess

9. O&MofMBRincludesallchemical(Cleaning,Polymeretc.,)cost
10. CapitalcostofMBRincludesmembranereplacementcostfor15
years
11. AllWSP,sshouldhavemechanicalpretreatmentworks(Alltypesof
screens&Gritchambers)
12. SBRdataisbasedondatacollectedfromworkingIndianSBRwithbio
selector,OURcontrol,RAS,Nitrogenremoval
13. Manpowercostisassumedtobe20percentlessfortreatmentonly
uptosecondarystage

UASB

:UpflowAnaerobicSludgeBlanket

MBBR :MovingBedBiologicalReactor

EA

:ExtendedAeration

SBR

MBR

:MembraneBioReactor

:SequentialBatchReactor

11|P a g e

WSP

:WasteStabilizationPond

ReportCode:003_GBP_IIT_EQP_S&R_02_Ver1_Dec2010

Exhibit1:AssessmentofTechnologyOptionsforSewageTreatmentintheGangaRiverBasin
Criteria

ASP

UASB+ASP

SBR

MBBR

MBR

WSP

All Flows

All Flows

All Flows

Smaller

Smaller

All Flows

Performance in Terms of Quality of Treated Sewage


Potential of Meeting the RAPs TSS, BOD, and COD Discharge Standards
Potential of Total / Faecal Coliform Removal
Potential of DO in Effluent
Potential for Low Initial/Immediate Oxygen Demand
Potential for Nitrogen Removal (Nitrification-Denitrification)
Potential for Phosphorous Removal

Performance Reliability
Impact of Effluent Discharge
Potential of No Adverse Impact on Land
Potential of No Adverse Impact on Surface Waters
Potential of No Adverse Impact on Ground Waters

Potential for Economically Viable Resource Generation


Manure / Soil Conditioner
Fuel
Economically Viable Electricity Generation/Energy Recovery
Food

Impact of STP
Potential of No Adverse Impacts on Health of STP Staff/Locals
Potential of No Adverse Impacts on Surrounding Building/Properties

Potential of Low Energy Requirement


Potential of Low Land Requirement
Potential of Low Capital Cost
Potential of Low Recurring Cost
Potential of Low Reinvestment Cost
Potential of Low Level of Skill in Operation
Potential of Low Level of Skill in Maintenance
Track Record
Typical Capacity Range, MLD

Low

Medium

High

Very High

ASP

:ActivatedSludgeProcess

UASB

:UpflowAnaerobicSludgeBlanket

MBBR :MovingBedBiologicalReactor

EA

:ExtendedAeration

SBR

MBR

:MembraneBioReactor

:SequentialBatchReactor

12|P a g e

WSP

:WasteStabilizationPond

ReportCode:003_GBP_IIT_EQP_S&R_02_Ver1_Dec2010

6. SludgeManagement
The sludge dewatering should be done using thickener followed by filter press or
centrifugeoranyotherequivalentmechanicaldevice.Sludgedryingbeds(SDB)should
be provided for emergency only. SDBs should be designed only for 25% of the sludge
generated from primary and secondary processes. The compressed sludge should be
converted into good quality manure using composting and/or vermicomposting
processes. Energy generation through anaerobic digestion of sludges in the form of
biogas and subsequent conversion to electrical energy as of now is viable only when
sewageBOD>250mg/L.Singlefuelenginesshouldbeusedforconversionofbiogasto
electrical energy. Hazardous sludge, if any should be disposed of as per the prevailing
regulations.

7. FlowMeasurement
FlowmeasuringdevicesshouldbeinstalledaftertheStageITreatmentaswellasatthe
outlet of the sewage treatment plant. These flow devices should be of properly
calibrated V notch with arrangements for automatic measurement of head. Additional
electronicorothertypeofflowmetersmayalsobeinstalled.Arrangementsshouldbe
madeforrealtimedisplayofmeasured(bothcurrentandmonthlycumulative)flowsat
prominentplaces.

8. BioassayTest
The bioassay test is gaining importance in wastewater treatment plant design and
operationasthewholeeffluenttoxicity(WET)test.Thistestusesastandardspeciesof
aquaticlifeforms(likefish,algae)asasurrogatetomeasuretheeffectoftheeffluenton
the receiving stream. The flowthrough method employing continuous sampling is
recommendedforonsitetests.

Flowrate(retentiontime):Foraflowthroughsystem,theUSEPAManualforAcute
Toxicity Test of Effluents (USEPA, 2002) specifies that the flow rate through the
proportionaldilutormustprovideforaminimumoffive90%replacementsofwater
volumeineachtestchamberevery24h(i.e.aretentiontimeof4.8h)(seeFigure3).
This replacement rate should provide sufficient flow to maintain an adequate
concentration of dissolved oxygen (DO). This implies a maximum HRT of 5.3 h (i.e.
0.9V/Q = 4.8) for a flowthrough system. Therefore, a flowthrough pond with a
maximum HRT of 5 h for 100% exposure is recommended for bioassay test of
tertiarytreatedeffluent.
Totalflowrequirement:10%oftheflow(subjectedtomaximum1MLD)isrequired
topassthroughthebioassaypond.

13|P a g e

ReportCode:003_GBP_IIT_EQP_S&R_02_Ver1_Dec2010

Time for Partial Replacement, Hours

100
40

10

1
0.1

0.4

10

40

100

Volume of Water in Tank / Flow of Water per Hour


99% Replacement

95% Replacement

75% Replacement

50% Replacement

90% Replacement

Figure3:Approximatetimesrequiredtoreplacewaterintestchambersinflowthroughtests
(For Example: For a chamber containing 4 L, with a flow of 2 L/h, the above graph
indicatesthat90%ofthewaterwouldbereplacedevery4.8h.Thesametimeperiod,
suchashours,mustbeusedonbothaxes,andthesameunitofvolume,suchasliters,
mustbeusedforbothvolumeandflow(AdaptedfromUSEPA,2002)

Depthofflowthroughsystemorpond:Thedepthoftheflowthroughbioassaypond
shouldbewithin1.5to2.5mbasedonanequivalentsystemofwastewaterfedfish
pond(aquaculture)(CostaPierce,1998;HoanandEdwards,2005).
Testorganisms:Inthebioassaypond,locallyfoundfish,algaeanddaphniashouldbe
inhabited in the bioassay pond. USEPA (2002) and APHA et al. (1995) have
recommended following freshwaterfish species when fish is the preferred form of
aquaticlife/testorganism:
1. Oncorhynchusmykiss(rainbowtrout)andSalvelinusfontinalis(brooktrout)
2. Pimephalespromelas(fatheadminnow)
3. Lepomismacrochirus(Bluegillsunfish)
4. Ictaluruspunctatus(Channelcatfish)

Based on above, following equivalent fish species are recommended under Indian
conditions.
1. Puntiasstigma
2. Puntiassophore
3. Anabas
4. Chelabacalia
5. Puntiastictoand
6. Colisafaciatus

14|P a g e

ReportCode:003_GBP_IIT_EQP_S&R_02_Ver1_Dec2010

Other freshwater fish species like Gambusia affinis (mosquito fish) can also be
considered.DaphniapulexandD.magna(daphnids),Selenastrumsp.,Scenedesmus
aculeala, Scenedesmus guadacanda are also recommended similar to the
recommendationsmadebyUSEPA(2002)forbioassaytest.

Stocking density and number of test organisms: For flowthrough tests, the live
weight of test organisms in the system must not exceed 7.0 g/L (i.e. 7.0 kg/m3) of
volumeatl5C,or2.5g/L(i.e.2.5kg/m3)at25C(USEPA,2002).Aminimumof20
organismsofagivenspeciesarerequiredforthetest.

Feeding requirement: Considering the bioassay of tertiarytreated sewage effluent


andfishasthepreferredformofaquaticlife/testorganism,32%proteinfeedat1%
ofthestockingbiomass/dintwodailyslots(preferablymorningandevening)witha
floating system need to be fed (CostaPierce, 1998). The feeding regime for fish
mentionedinUSEPA(2002)canalsobeadopted.

Aerationandoxygenrequirements:SufficientDO(4.0mg/Lforwarmwaterspecies
and 6.0 mg/L for cold water species) should be maintained in the pond for proper
environmentfortestorganisms.TheDOdepletionisnotaproblemincaseofaflow
throughsystembecauseaerationoccursasthewaterpassthroughthesystem.IfDO
decreasestoalevelthatwouldbeasourceofadditionalstress,theturnoverrateof
thewatervolumemustbeincreased(i.e.theHRTofthesystemmustbedecreased)
sufficientlytomaintainacceptableDOlevels(USEPA,2002).Alternativelyfountainor
cascadeaerationarrangementsmaybeprovided.

Requirement of Dechlorination: Dechlorinated effluent only should be passed


through the bioassay pond. If the effluent from the STP is chlorinated, the total
residualchlorineintheeffluentshouldbenondetectableafterdechlorination.

Bioassaytestacceptabilitycriterion:Nomortality(100%survival)oftestorganisms
underanycondition.

SalientFeaturesofRecommendedSTPs
Continuousmeasurementofflowattheinletandoutlet
Excellentpreliminarytreatment
Treatmentuptotertiarylevel
Onlinebioassaytest
Designedandbuiltasmodularunits
PumpingandSTPstobetakentogetherforcontracting/bidding

15|P a g e

ReportCode:003_GBP_IIT_EQP_S&R_02_Ver1_Dec2010

9. References
APHA, AWWA, WEF (1995) Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and
Wastewater, 19th ed. American Public Health Association, American Water Works
Association,WaterEnvironmentFederation,Washington,DC.
Arceivala,S.J.andAsolekar,S.R.(2006)WastewaterTreatmentforPollutionControl
(3rdEdition),McGrawHillEducation(India)Pvt.Ltd.,NewDelhi
Asolekar, S. R. and Gopichandran,R. (2005) Preventive Environmental Management
AnIndianPerspective,FoundationBooks Pvt. Ltd.,NewDelhi(theIndianassociateof
CambridgeUniversityPress,UK)
CostaPierce, B.A. (1998) Preliminary investigation of an integrated aquaculture
wetlandecosystemusingtertiarytreatedmunicipalwastewaterinLosAngelesCounty,
California.Ecol.Eng.10,341354.
Hoan,V.Q.,Edwards,P.(2005)WastewaterreusethroughurbanaquacultureinHanoi,
Vietnam:Statusandprospects,in:CostaPierce,B.A.,Desbonnet,A.,Edwards,P.(Eds.),
UrbanAquaculture,CABIPublishing,Wallingford,UK,pp.103117.
Kumar,R.(2010)DraftUnpublishedReportentitled:StatusofSewageWastewaterand
TechnologyReviewInIndia,NEERIZonalOffice,Mumbai
Tare,V.andBose,P.(2009)CompendiumofSewageTreatmentTechnologies,National
RiverConservationDirectorate,MinistryofEnvironmentalandForests,Governmentof
India
USEPA (2002) Methods for Measuring the Acute Toxicity of Effluents and Receiving
Waters to Freshwater and Marine Organisms. Fifth ed. EPA821R02012. Washington
DC,U.S.A.

16|P a g e

ReportCode:003_GBP_IIT_EQP_S&R_02_Ver1_Dec2010

AppendixI:ExhibitsonOptionsfor
SecondaryTreatment

Exhibit1:ASPConventionalActivatedSludgeProcess

Influent

PST

Aeration
Tank

Secondary
Clarifier

ReturnedSludge

Effluent

ExcessSludge

SchematicDiagramofaConventionalActivatedSludgeProcess

Activated Sludge Process (ASP) is a suspended growth aerobic process. It is provided


with primary clarifier to reduce the organic load in biological reactor (aeration basin).
About 40% of organic load is intercepted in primary clarifier in the form of sludge,
decreasing the loading in the aeration tank. Detention period in aeration tank is
maintained between 46 h. After aeration tank, the mixed liquor is sent to secondary
clarificationwheresludgeandliquidareseparated.Amajorportionofthesludgeisre
circulatedandexcesssludgeissenttoadigester.
Sludgegeneratedinprimaryclarifierandexcesssludgefromsecondaryclarifierarenot
matured, digestion of such sludge is essential before disposal. In anaerobic sludge
digestion,suchsludgeproducesbiogaswhichcanbeusedforpowergenerationbygas
engines.Generatedpowercanbeusedforoperationofplant.
Merits

Goodprocessflexibility
Reliableoperation
Proventrackrecordinallplantsizes
Lesslandrequirements
Lowodoremission
Energyproduction
Abilitytowithstandnominalchangesinwatercharacteristics

Highenergyconsumption
Skilledoperatorsneeded
Uninterruptedpowersupplyisrequired
Requiressludgedigestionanddrying
Lessnutrientremoval

Demerits

17|P a g e

ReportCode:003_GBP_IIT_EQP_S&R_02_Ver1_Dec2010

Exhibit2:MBBRMovingBedBiofilmReactor

Influent

MBBRI

MBBRII

AirBlower

Secondary
Clarifier

Effluent

ExcessSludge

SchematicDiagramofaMovingBedBioReactor

MovingBedBiofilmReactorisanaerobicattachedbiologicalgrowthprocess.Itdoesnot
requireprimaryclarifierandsludgerecirculation.Rawsewage,afterscreeningandde
gritting,isfedtothebiologicalreactor.Inthereactor,floatingplasticmediaisprovided
whichremainsinsuspension.Biologicalmassisgeneratedonthesurfaceofthemedia.
Attached biological mass consumes organic matter for their metabolism. Excess
biological mass leaves the surface of media and it is settled in clarifier. Usually a
detentiontimeof5to12hisprovidedinthereactors.
MBBR were initially used for small sewage flow rates and because of less space
requirement.Inlargeplant,mediaquantityisveryhighanditrequireslongshutdown
periodforplantmaintenance.Infact,itmaynotbesuccessfulforlargecapacityplants.
Moreovertheplasticmediaispatentedandnotavailableintheopenmarket,leadingto
singlesupplierconditionswhichlimitordenypricecompetition.Inaddition,duetovery
less detention time and other engineering factors, functional Moving Bed Biofilm
ReactorinIndiadonotproduceacceptablequalityeffluent.
Merits

Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor needs less space since there is no primary
clarifieranddetentionperiodinreactorisgenerally45h.
Abilitytowithstandshockloadwithequalizationtankoption
Highoperatoroversightisnotrequired

Highoperatingcostduetolargepowerrequirements
Notmuchexperienceavailablewithlargercapacityplants(>1.5MLD)
Skilledoperatorsneeded
Noenergyproduction
EffluentqualitynotuptothemarkinIndia
Muchlessnutrientremoval
Designedcriterianotwellestablished

Demerits

18|P a g e

ReportCode:003_GBP_IIT_EQP_S&R_02_Ver1_Dec2010

Exhibit3:SBRSequencingBatchReactor

SchematicDiagramofaSequencingBatchReactor(AContinuousProcessInBatch)

It is a fillanddraw batch aerobic suspended growth (Activated Sludge) process


incorporating all the features of extended aeration plant. After screening and degritting,
sewage is fed to the batch reactor. Reactor operation takes place in certain sequence in
cyclicorderandineachcycle,followingoperationsareinvolved
AnoxicFillingtank
Aeration
Sedimentation/clarification
Decantation
Sludgewithdrawal

A number of largescale plants exist around the world with several years of continuous
operation.InIndiaalso,therearelargescaleplantsoperatingefficientlysincemorethana
year. Hundreds of fullscale plants operated on Sequencing Batch Reactor Technology are
undersuccessfuloperationinJapan.Somepartsarepatentedandnotavailableintheopen
market,leadingtosinglesupplierconditionswhichlimitordenypricecompetition.

Merits

Excellenteffluentquality
Smallerfootprintbecauseofabsenceofprimary,secondaryclarifiersanddigester
RecenttrackrecordavailableinlargeapplicationsinIndiaalso
Biologicalnutrient(N&P)removal
Highdegreeofcoliformremoval
Lesschlorinedosingrequiredforpostdisinfection
Abilitytowithstandhydraulicandorganicshockloads

Demerits

Comparativelyhighenergyconsumption
Toachievehighefficiency,completeautomationisrequired
Highlyskilledoperatorsneeded
Noenergyproduction
Uninterruptedpowersupplyrequired

19|P a g e

ReportCode:003_GBP_IIT_EQP_S&R_02_Ver1_Dec2010

Exhibit4:UASB+ASPUpflowAnaerobicSludgeBlanketFollowedbyActivatedSludge
Process

Gas

Influent

UASB

Aeratio
nTank

ReturnedSludge
Sludge

Secondary
Clarifier

Effluent

ExcessSludge

SchematicDiagramofanUpflowAnaerobicSludgeBlanketProcessfollowedbyASP

Itisananaerobicprocessinwhichinfluentwastewaterisdistributedatthebottomof
the UASB reactor and travels in an upflow mode through the sludge blanket. Critical
components of UASB design are the influent distribution system, the gasliquidsolid
separator (GLSS) and effluent withdrawal design. Compared to other anaerobic
processes,UASBallowstheuseofhighhydraulicloading.
Merits

Relativelysimpleoperationandmaintenance
Noexternalenergyrequirementandhencelessvulnerabletopowercuts
Noprimarytreatmentrequired
Energyproductionpossiblebutgenerallynotachieved
Lowsludgeproduction
Nospecialcareorseedingrequiredafterinterruptedoperations
Canabsorbhydraulicandorganicshockloading

Posttreatmentrequiredtomeettheeffluentstandard
Anoxiceffluentexertshighoxygendemand
LargeLandrequirement
MoremanpowerrequireforO&M
Effluent quality is not up to the mark and poor fecal and total coliform
removal
FoulsmellandcorrosionproblemsaroundSTParea
Highchlorinedosingrequiredfordisinfection.
Lessnutrientremoval

Demerits

20|P a g e

ReportCode:003_GBP_IIT_EQP_S&R_02_Ver1_Dec2010

Exhibit5:MBRMembraneBioreactor

Effluent

WasteSludge

Permeate

MixedLiquidRecycle
Influent

Membrane
Module

Anoxic
Zone

MixedLiquid
recirculationpump

Aeration

AirScourBlower

BIOREACTOR

SchematicDiagramofaMembraneBioreactor

It is a biological reactor with a suspended biomass. The solidliquid separation in


membranebioreactorisachievedbyamicrofiltrationmembranewithporesizesranging
from0.1to0.4m.Nosecondaryclarifierisusedandhastheabilitytooperateathigh
MLSS concentrations. Membranes are patented and not available in the open market,
leadingtosinglesupplierconditionswhichlimitordenypricecompetition.
Merits

Lowhydraulicretentiontimeandhencelowfootprint(area)requirement
Lesssludgeproduction
Highqualityeffluentintermsoflowturbidity,TSS,BODandbacteria
Stabilizedsludge
Abilitytoabsorbshockloads

Highconstructioncost
Veryhighoperationcost
Periodiccleaningandreplacementofmembranes
Highmembranecost
Highautomation
Foulingofmembrane
Noenergyproduction

Demerits

21|P a g e

ReportCode:003_GBP_IIT_EQP_S&R_02_Ver1_Dec2010

Exhibit 6: WSP Waste Stabilization Pond (Combination of Anaerobic


andAerobicPond)

Anaerobicpond
HRT=1day

Influent

Facultativepond
HRT=5days

Maturationponds
HRT=34days
Effluent

Sludgestoragelagoon
and
Sludgedryingbeds

Aquaculturepond
(HRT>12days)
(optional)

SchematicDiagramofaWasteStabilizationPond

Sewageistreatedinaseriesofearthenponds.Initiallyafterscreeninganddegrittingitis
fedtoananaerobicpondforinitialpretreatment;depthofanaerobicpondisusually3to3.5
m;asaresultthelowersectionofponddoesnotgetoxygenandananaerobicconditionis
developed.BODreductiontakesplacebyanaerobicmetabolismandgaseslikeammoniaand
hydrogensulphideareproducedcreatingodorproblems.AfterreductionofBODby40%it
enters the facultative/aerobic pond, which is normally 1 1.5 m in depth. Lesser depth
allows continuous oxygen diffusion from atmosphere; in addition algae in the pond also
producesoxygen.
ThoughBODattheoutletremainswithintherange,sometimestheeffluenthasgreencolor
duetopresenceofalgae.Thealgaegrowthcancontributetothedeteriorationofeffluent
quality (higher total suspended solids) from time to time. Moreover, coliforms removal is
alsoin12logorder.Theoperatingcostofawastestabilizationpondisminimum,mostly
related to the cost of cleaning the pond once in two to three years. A waste stabilization
pond requires a very large land area and it is normally used for small capacity plant,
especiallywherebarrenlandisavailable.

Merits

Simpletoconstructandoperateandmaintain
Lowoperatingandmaintenancecost
Selfsufficiency,ecologicalbalance,andeconomicviabilityisgreater
Possiblerecoveryofthecompleteresources
Goodabilitytowithstandhydraulicandorganicloadfluctuations

Requiresextremelylargeareas
Largeevaporationlossofwater
Iflinerisbreached,groundwaterisimpacted
Effluentqualitymayvarywithseasons
Noenergyproduction
Comparativelyinferiorqualityofeffluent
Lessnutrientremoval
Highchlorinedosingfordisinfection
Odorandvectornuisance
Lossofvaluablegreenhousegasestotheatmosphere

Demerits

22|P a g e

ReportCode:003_GBP_IIT_EQP_S&R_02_Ver1_Dec2010

Exhibit7:CWConstructedWetlands

Wetlands are natural processes similar to stabilization ponds. Wetlands are shallow
ponds comprising of submerged plants and floating islands of marshy species. Natural
forces including chemical, physical, biological and solar is involved in the process to
achieve wastewater treatment. Thick mats of vegetation trap suspend solids and
biologicalprocesstakesplaceattherootsoftheplants.Itproducesthedesiredquality
oftreatedsewagebutlandrequirementisveryhigh,thoughitislesscomparedtowaste
stabilizationpond.Runningcostiscomparativelylow.
Wetlandprocesshavenotyetestablishedcomparedtootherprocesses.Therearetwo
typesofsystems;surfaceandsubsurfacedistributionofsewage.Thetypeofvegetation
grown varies, in some cases there is regular tree cutting and plantation as a part of
maintenancework.PlantslikeTypha,Phragamites,KattailcanbeusedinIndia.Another
typeofwetlandsuseaplantcalledduckweedfortreatment.Thisweedhasaveryfast
metabolicrateandabsorbspollutantsveryquickly.
Merits
Simpletoconstructandoperateandmaintain
Lowoperatingandmaintenancecost
Selfsufficiency,ecologicalbalance,andeconomicviabilityisgreater
Possibilityofcompleteresourcerecovery
Goodabilitytowithstandhydraulicandorganicloadfluctuations
Demerits
Requireslargearea
Largeevaporationlossofwater
Noteasytorecoverfrommassiveupset
Iflinerisbreached,groundwaterisimpacted
Effluentqualitymayvarywithseasons
Noenergyproduction
Nonutrientremoval
Odorandvectornuisance
Lossofvaluablegreenhousegasestotheatmosphere

23|P a g e

You might also like