Loading presentation...

Present Remotely

Send the link below via email or IM

Copy

Present to your audience

Start remote presentation

  • Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
  • People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
  • This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
  • A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
  • Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article

Do you really want to delete this prezi?

Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.

DeleteCancel

Make your likes visible on Facebook?

Connect your Facebook account to Prezi and let your likes appear on your timeline.
You can change this under Settings & Account at any time.

No, thanks

PhD defense 2013

water like presentation
by

Manel Garrido

on 17 July 2015

Comments (0)

Please log in to add your comment.

Report abuse

Transcript of PhD defense 2013

Problem Analysis
Collecting Data / Knowledge Acquisition
Data and Knowledge Analysis
Model Selection and Implementation
Advice from
experts
in the wastewater management,
engineers
,
companies
and wastewater treatment
authorities

Visits
to pilot plants and existing wastewater treaments plants
Legislation
Based on the methodology proposed by
Poch et al., 2004
for the development of EDSSs
274 technologies within the wastewater treament process have been identified and characterized
Challenges
Development of an environmental
decision support

system
for the
selection
and
integrated assessment
of process flow diagrams in wastewater treatment

Introduction
Building
Case Studies
Conclusions
Outline
How
the Novedar_EDSS is being
built
?
Introduction
Motivation
1
Building the Novedar_EDSS
2
How to operate Novedar_EDSS
Research contribution
3
EDSS Results
Case Studies
4
Conclusions
Future Work
5
A Decision Support System For WWTP Conceptual Flow Diagrams
Thesis Outline
Wastewater
Treatment Plants (WWTPs)
Treatment processes
have been
steadily

growing
and there is a large number of treatment technologies which can potentially be implemented in every case
Conventional
High number
of available technologies
Low-loaded technologies
Emergent
Phases and
sequence
of
decisions
in a typical WWT project
Wastewater Management Options
Facility Configuration and Technology
Project Phasing and Optimization
Detailed Design
Facility Operation
Impact on
project costs
and
value
decreases as project proceeds
(Glen T. Daigger; WWTmod 2010)
Decisions in these
initial phases
have the higher impact
NOVEDAR
_EDSS
Technological (innovative and conventional), legislation, social, expert
knowledge
Economic benefits
Sources recovery
Avoided impact
Energy production
Technical optimization
Biogas
Methodologies to quantify such impacts
Sludge-related products (compost, inert usable material, etc)
Energy recovery ( incineration, sludge)
Oxygen requirements minimization
Enhancement of biological/degradation processes
Technological Advances
Head returns
Biogas enhancement
Low consuming energy processes
Environmetal Care
Life Cycle Assessment tools
Priority Pollutants removal
Ecological and landscape plant integration
Renewable resources
I+D+ i
Bio-products
Control strategies
Uncertainty management
Benchmarking, modelling improvements
Conceptual
design of WWTP is
complex
Pre-treatment
Primary
Treatment
Secondary
Treatment
Tertiary
Treatment
Sludge
Treatment
Odour
Treatments
Head Returns
7
Main WWTP
Sections
Reduce Odours
Reduce Sludge Production
Resource Recovery
Removal of Emergent Contaminants
Simplify Plant Operations and Labour
Reclaimed water
Reduce Chemical consumption
XXI Century
Challenge
New paradigm in wastewater treatment
Meet conventional objectives with emerging
priorities
and
criteria
Nutrient Removal
Increase Reactor’s Biomass
Suitable to Dynamic Scenarios
Improve Stability Process
Meet stricter regulations
Decentralized systems
...
Integration of the eco-
efficiency
and
sustainability
prespective
Eco-efficiency
generates more value through
technology
and process changes whilst
reducing resource use
and
environmental impact
throughout the plant's life
High number of possible
scenarios
Arid Areas
Agricultural Demand
Industrial Activity
Rural Areas
Reclaimed Water
Wetlands and sensitive areas
Space Limitations
High Stational Variation
Eco
-Efficiency
Thesis Goal
Development of an EDSS to face XXI century Challenges
Conceptual methodology for an EDSS
State of the art
Design Science Research
WWTP Knowledge
EDSS Potentialities
A
methodology
for the selection and assessment of WWTP flow diagrams
Contributes
Contributes
Contributes
Validation
Real world conceptual schemes
State-of-the-art of WWTP flow diagrams
A
support engine
for the selection and assessment of WWTP flow diagrams
Poch et al. 2004
: Designing and building real environmental decision support systems. Environmental Modelling and Software.
Validation
Methodology Models
Hierarchical Architecture
The general principle consist of
sub-diving a complex problem
into a number of sub-problems requiring abstraction and the considerations of the relationships among them
Units (U):
the lowest level of abstraction

Sub-Meta-Units (sMU):
in this intermediate level

Meta- Units (MU):
The highest level of abstraction. A MU encapsulate several U or sMU which are physically connected and share common purposes
The hierarchical design process
breaks down
the problem of WWTP flow diagram generation into a set of issues easier to analyze and to evaluate
(Douglas, 1988)
Different levels of abstraction are defined
(Lopez-Arevalo et al., 1996)
Lopez-Arevalo et al. (1996) ··· Vidal et al. (2002) ··· Flores et al. (2005) ··· Zeng et al. (2007) ··· Beltran et al. (2009) ··· Bañares et al. (2010)
Figure 3.3 (Thesis manuscript).

Level of detail of the design approach in the different abstraction levels.
(Video:)
EDSS
Conceptual Representation
Compatibility Knowledge Base Figures.
The C-KBs are
unidirectional
tables
establishing
for each technology which
type of interaction
corresponds with the rest of WWTP-related technologies
Knowledge-based
System
Knowledge-based system provide the essential and necessary knowledge for
understanding
,
formulating
and
solving
problems
Knowledge Bases
S-KB
(WWTP- related Treatment
characteristics
)
C-KB
(WWTP-related Treatments
compatibilities
)
The
selection of models
composing the artificial intelligent tool (
knowledge-based system
) in order to
generate
and
select
WWTP flow diagrams options
Specification Knowledge Base Figures.
88 factors
covering five main topics provides the knowledge required for each technology
Metcalf and Eddy, (2003) ··· MHW (2005) ··· Garrido-Baserba et al. (2010)
Stores data from scenario definition to be available during the performance evaluation process (e.g. flow rate, maximum and minimum BOD, nitrates, desired effluent quality etc.)
Linked to the rest of knowledge bases (Kbs defining reuse characteristics, technologies specifications, compatibilities etc.)
Containing internal node data: Function, cluster characteristics, theological properties, etc.

Edge is used to send the output from a previous node as a Input for the next one (e.g. BOD: 220mg/L, nitrates concentration, emergent contaminant, etc.).
Edges contains the compatibility properties between nodes and clusters of nodes (sub meta-units) and other possible complementary interactions.
Linked to the S-KBu. Data from previous node is used to calculated the node performance using expressions and specifications defined in the knowledge base obtaining the two types of output.
Output data (type 1) obtained from the node is sent to the Data Processing Module for further analysis during the overall treatment train evaluation (Operation costs: 6.438€, etc.)
Output data (type 2) is send to compatible nodes (e.g. BOD: 22-35 mg/L, 25% removal of emergent contaminants, etc.) until an end-node is reached.
Containing internal node data: Function, cluster characterístics, teological properties, corresponding meta-unit and submeta-unit, etc.
Once an end-node is reached the system cheks if the results fits with the desired effluent quality. If it reach the desired quality:
The output data can be displayed to the user.
Output from previous nodes stored in the Data Processing Module is collect and analysed using MCDM.
If the effluent quality does not match the desired conditions the pathway is discarded.
Input data from previous node (e.g. BOD: 22-25mg/L)
Compatibility information either between units or submeta-units interactions.
A
Structural Network
approach for the
generation
of PFDs
Creating conceptual WWTP process flow
diagrams
Technology interactions and their connectivity properties are represented as the
edges

WWTP technologies are represented as
nodes
within the network structure
All possible combinations of elements can be extracted from the structure as a single PFD in order to carry out a individualized evaluation
The individualized evaluation enables to rank and select the most suitable PFDs from the whole response surface
The network structure is create combining both typologies of KBs:
Specifications
and
Compatibility
The
synthesis of the design problem
in a network structure brings the chance to
embrace
all possible WWTP configurations (PFDs)
Functional Network
for PFDs assessment and selection
Functional
network
Recursive
Evaluation
Data
Processing
Module
Unidirectional combination of
The
data processing
module (DPM) is the
core
of the proposed EDSS
The DPM
extracts
the collected
knowledge
from the previously presented KBs (S-KB, C-KB and E-KB)
Data
Processing
Module (DPM)
Suggests
WWTP alternatives taking into account the compatibility amongst the treatment technologies
Screens
the WWTP solutions accomplishing the degree of satisfaction of the considered objectives
Propagates
the data from the scenario definition through the generated PFDs for subsequent evaluation
DPM
and
Recursive
evaluation
The DPM
creates a network structure
using the compatibilities embraced in the C-Kb
The DPM
applies the recursive evaluation
method to create a functional network structure
Abstraction
Levels
The DPM creates three functional network but with different degree of complexity
Saves time and computer sources discardinding inappropriate PFD alternatives that do not meet user requirements at higher abstraction levels
The recursive evaluation supports the
exploration
of the multiple
technological combinations
contained within the created network structure (
response surface
)
The
evaluation
of each potential PFD relies on the data introduced by the user in the
data entry step
Combining data from the scenario defined
This methodology is only used in the EDSS when the
experience
and
expertise
from
professionals
and
experts
can be converted to
rules
using decision trees able to provide the results in an
easier way
than using other more complex analytical methods
Rule-based
System
Nitrogen
Decision Tree
DT 1
Rule-based System
Phosphorous
Decision Tree
DT 2
After a previous study,
two categories
in Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) were found as the best indicators for the environmental assessment
Environmental Vector (LCA)
implementation

into the Novedar_DSS
Characterization factors used for
GWP
for selected substances
emitted to air
Background processes
selected from the
Ecoinvent
database and corresponding
emission factors
for the two impact categories

The inclusion of a
life cycle perspective
entails the consideration of not only the
direct impacts
but also the
indirect impacts
:
inputs
(materials and energy use) and
outputs
(emissions and waste generated)
Characterization factors used for

EP
for selected substances
emitted to water
Eutrophication
Potential
(EP)
Global Warming
Potential
(GWP)
An
innovative
methodology provide an
economic value
to the
avoided impact
using the wastewater treatment
Integrated
Assessment
of WWTPs
Models for the Integrated Assessment
Including the
environmental
and
economic
vector when selecting a wastewater treatment plant
Suitable
PFDs
created using the
EDSS
Life Cycle Assessment
(LCA) is the most promising approach
The application of wider
sustainability criteria
is essential in order to identify the
real
environmental
impacts
of wastewater treatment plants
Multi-criteria
EDSS
output
Eutrophication is considered the most relevant impact category in the majority of published LCAs in WWTPs
GWP is recognized as a significant problem worldwide from a politic and social point of view (UN, 2010), as well as one of the most well understood and used categories
M. Garrido-Baserba, A. Hospido, R. Reif, M. Molinos-Senante and M. Poch (2012). Including the environmental vector when selecting a wastewater treatment plant. Submitted to Environmental Modelling and Software
Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA)
CBA
main premise considers that projects should only be commissioned when
benefits
exceed
the aggregate
costs
SWWT

Case Study
Firstly, a
CBA
was carried out considering internal costs and benefits whose value was
determined
by the market
CBA
was to calculate according the
benefits
of three
reuse
scenarios (
sale of reclaimed water
)
Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA)
Selection of the
most adequate SWWT technology
:
9 Treatments
against
9 different scenarios
Cost comparison for the selected treatments. O&M (M€/year); Investment (M€) and TEC (M€)
Net present value without taking into account environmental benefits
M. Molinos-Senante, M. Garrido-Baserba, R. Reif, F. Hernández-Sancho and M. Poch (2012). Assessment of wastewater treatment plants design for small communities: Environmental and economic aspects. Science of theTotal Environment. 427-428, 11-18.
In this approach the
environmental benefits
of treating wastewater have been included by considering the
shadow price
of the pollutants removed according to
sensitive area requirements
Net present value taking into account the environmental benefits for the low loaded scenarios
Net present value taking into account the environmental benefits for the moderate loaded scenarios
Cost-Benefit Analysis taking into account environmental externalities
Shadow prices
calculated represent the value of
external effects
that could
damage the environment
in the case of inadequate management
Shadow prices
are equivalent to the value of the
positive externalities
associated with
avoiding the discharge pollution
into the environment
Eckstein & Otto (1958) ··· Campbell & Brown (2003) ··· Boardman et al. (2006) ··· Hernández-Sancho et al. (2009)
Färe et al. (1993) ··· Coggins and Swinton (1996) ··· Swinton et al. (1998) ··· Garrod & Willis (1999) ··· Reig et al. (2000) ··· Hernández-Sancho et al. (2010) ··· Molinos-Senante et al. (2011)
Net present value taking into account the environmental benefits for the high loaded scenarios
Shadow prices for pollutants removed from wastewater (€/kg). Shadow prices are interpreted positively because they represent the environmental benefits obtained by treating wastewater (Hernández-Sancho et al., 2010)
A RBS is extremely useful in providing a quick screening in those situations where
experts experience
plays a key role
RBS
Improve
the explanations and
reasoning
that the EDSS communicates
to the user
, as rules (or branches) whose condition are satisfied encapsulate the explanation of
the WHY
the EDSS have reached this option
Decision Trees Implementation
devoted to
remove nutrients
in wastewater treatment depending on the
C/N
and
C/P

ratios
in the influent
The rule-based system synthesized the selection of technologies devoted to reduced
nitrogen
in specific scenarios
Technologies
included in the DT 1:
Biological Nutrient Removal
(BNR), Anammox-related process (
Deamonification
),
Acid fermentation
and
Carbon source
strategies
Decision Tree 1 - Nitrogen Removal Purposes
The rule-based system synthesized the selection of technologies devoted to reduce
phosphorus
in specific scenario
Technologies
included in the DT 2:
Enhanced Biological Phosphorus Removal
(EBPR),
Membrane
-related systems,
Conventional filtration
and
Coagulant salts
Decision Tree 2 - Phosphorus Removal Purposes
Two complementary decision trees to support technology selection for some specifics cases were implemented in the EDSS
EDSS
Evaluation
and
Validation
The set of
tools or models
for the selection and assessment of WWTP flow diagrams
Validation
Real world conceptual schemes
State-of-the-art of WWTP flow diagrams
The
EDSS Structure
for the selection and assessment of of PFDs
Poch et al. 2004:
Designing and building real environmental decision support systems. Environmental Modelling and Software.
Methodology

Validation
: LCA
The EDSS must be tested to check its
robustness
,
accuracy
,
usefulness
and
usability
, both from the
user
’s and
scientist
’s perspective
A
detailed analysis
suggested that the LCA carried out by the EDSS for the
eutrophication

category
would match to one for real plants close to
90-95%
The
22 real WWTPs
previously
inventoried

and
assessed
(Rodriguez-Garcia et al., 2011a) were selected and used as a
validation tool
Correlation ratio (environmental indicator from DSS / environmental indicator from calculated data) for eutrophication potential
The
validation
done showed that LCA
pair-comparisons
match with the DSS predictions with an
error ratio lower than 0.5
in both categories analyzed (
Eutrophication

Potential
and
Global Warming

Potential
)
Correlation ratio (environmental indicator from DSS / environmental indicator from calculated data) for Global Warming potential
The
Global Warming
Potential
(GWP) reliability for the three technology typologies included (
CAS
,
Oxidation Ditch
and
Extensive Aeration
) was probed, with an average matching closely to
98%
Environmental

impact
of
22 WWTPs
computed
kg CO2 eq. /m3 treated effluent for the WWTPs (M=Measured vs. S=Simulated)
kg CO2 eq. /m3 treated effluent for the WWTPs (M=Measured vs. S=Simulated)
kg PO43- eq. /m3 treated effluent for the WWTPs (M=Measured vs. S=Simulated)
kg PO43- eq. /m3 treated effluent for the WWTPs (M=Measured vs. S=Simulated)
kg CO2 eq. /m3 treated effluent for the WWTPs (M=Measured vs. S=Simulated)
kg PO43- eq. /m3 treated effluent for the WWTPs (M=Measured vs. S=Simulated)
Emitted to water: COD (g/m3)
Data entry

process of 22
WWTPs
computed through DSS led to an estimated
inventory
for each plant
Inert Solids disposal Waste (g/m3)
Emitted to water: Total Phosphorous (g/m3)
emitted to water: Total Nitrogen (g/m3)
Energy use & methane recovery (KWh/m3)
Process: Polyelectrolite (g/m3)
Transport (Kg•Km)
Sludge disposal: land application (Kg WW)
Fertilizers avoided (g/m3)
N2O and NH3 emissions (g/m3 to air)
PO43- emissions (g/m3 to water)
Global Warming
Eutrophication
Results from the EDSS devoted to support the decision-making
Information within the
Knowledge Bases
(S-KB, C-KB an E-KB)
Decision Trees are part of a knowledge base (Rolston, 1991; Turban, 1992; and Krishnamoorthy and Rajeev, 1996)
Rule-based System
Data Gathering/ Scenario Definition
Step 1.
WWTP Alternatives
Generation
Scenario, Objectives and Criteria Definition
Screening the response surface
Step 2.

WWTP Alternatives
Selection
DSS
Interface
Diagnosis
Decision Support
Step 3.
WWTP Alternatives
Evaluation
The
interaction
between the
data entry
(defining Scenario, Objectives and Criteria) and the
knowledge
collected in the Knowledge bases allows to reduce the initial response surface of alternatives to only the most potential alternatives that maximizes the plant benefits
Alternatives:
Response surface
Most
Potential PDF
Alternatives according user
priorities
and
scenario
Most
Suitable WWTP
according to the defined scenario
Support during the design of WWTP alternatives configurations
Operation
Objectives prioritization
Life Cycle Analysis (LCA)
Environmental Externalities
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Applicable Legislation
Sludge Valorisation
Emergent Technologies
Carbon Footprint Analysis
Technical Performance
Results
Table
Technologies
selection
for the four scenarios and
complementary
nutrient removal
strategies
recommended
Case Studies
Upgrade Existing Plant
CBA priority
Space limitation
No Space Requirements
Simplicity
Environmental friendly
Space Constraints
Innovation Degree
No costs prioritization
Nitrogen

strategy
Deamonification
MeOH
Deamonification + MeOH
P precipitation + tertiary (physicochemical)
Phosphorous
strategy
P precipitation + tertiary (physicochemical)
P precipitation + tertiary (physicochemical)

BAF
IFAS (UCT)
Bardenpho
Nitrogen

strategy
Not required
Phosphorous
strategy
Not required
BAF
IFAS
Johannesburg
Nitrogen

strategy
Phosphorous
strategy
P precipitation
P precipitation
GSBR
IFAS (Johannesburg)
SBR
BAF + Membrane filtration (Tertiary)
Tertiary (physicochemical)
Johannesburg + conventional filtration (Tertiary)
Membrane BioReactor (UCT)
Not required
Not required
Not required
Reuse Option
Not required
Not required
Not required
P precipitation + tertiary (physicochemical)
Nitrogen

strategy
Not required
Phosphorous
strategy

AnoxAn or IFAS
Trickling Filter
Hybrid CWs
Not required
Not required
Not required
Not required
Not required
Scenario selection according to different
influent characteristics
Restrictions
considered for three scenarios influent (
A, B, C and D
)
PFD Alternatives
that achieved the highest
score
for subcases from
A1-D1 to A3-D3
Four scenarios
were assessed applying
different restrictions
or user
requirements
The selection was done using a
multi-criteria decision method
for evaluation of PFDs in order to integrated several
parameters
and
indicators
(environmental, economic and technical)
Based on the
combination
of these
criteria
, the EDSS was able to
propose
different alternatives providing the user with the
best option
for each case
Manel Garrido Baserba
Manel Poch Espallargas
Luis Larrea Urcola

If there are any
faults
at any of the development stages, the builders of the EDSS must
return
to a certain point of the
methodology diagram
and fix or update the required elements
These were the
recommendations
and
feasible solutions
obtained to
confront
the wide range of typical scenarios
Scenarios:
Enlargement and
upgrade
of existing plants,
reuse
demands, the increasing number of
sensitive areas
,
small communities
and the selection of biological processes satisfying simultaneously
different objectives
The incorporation of
multi-criteria
decision methods in the
evaluation
of treatment units enabled to embrace an integrated and
comprehensive analysis
of several parameters and indicators
Integrated Fixed Activated Sludge (IFAS)
was the most suggested option for the
retrofitting
of existing facilities
When
stricter
discharge
limits
were considered for nutrients
enhanced biological removal
configurations (Bardenpho, Johannesburg, etc.) were usually suggested
Innovative approaches
were also suggested in specific cases (
GSBR, AnoxAn, BAF; MBR
, ...), specially in situations with low
space
availability
In parallel
with the selection of the main treatment unit, specific operational
strategies
to comply with legal requirements were also assessed (
methanol addition
, phosphorus
precipitation
,
tertiary treatments
, etc.)
Such strategies were of particular relevance when the
C/N ratio
of the influent was not optimum
Based on the combination of the selected
criteria

the EDSS proposed
PFD
different

alternatives
There is a large number of treatment technologies which can
potentially
be implemented for the very same case
High number of available technologies
The large number of possible
scenarios
and different
objectives
can influence the requirements and affect the design of the plant

Need to integrate
technical
(i.e. engineering, legislation ...),
economic
and
ecological
aspects with
social
sensibilities (i.e. visual impact, odours ...)
Many different objectives, criteria and scenarios
The WWTP has to be
assessed
and
analyzed
from the end of the
sewage system
s until the process related sludge and effluent
final destination
. Not only the bioreactor.

Whatever
direct
and
indirect
impacts from the WWTP have to be considered
Integrated evaluation of the whole WWTP
The existing interactions among technologies makes difficult the establishment of
compatibilities
amongst the units comprising a wastewater flow diagram e.g. (Hybrid processes, complementary tertiary treatments, optional strategies ...
)
Many possible combinations of technologies
Need to integrate different fields of expertise, from heuristic knowledge (
experts experience
) to determinsitc methods as
statistical/numerical
, environmental
ontologies
, coupled
models
,
databases
, multicriteria and
assessment
tools
Include deterministic and heuristic knowledge
Conceptual
design
of WWTP is
complex
:
Hierarchical Structure
Optimizing the PFDs creation and selection
Knowledge
Sources
Conventional
sources
Novedar
Project Sources
Knowledge drawn from the
scientific
and
technical
literature
Interviews with
researches
within the NOVEDAR_Consolider Project
"Conception of the WWTP of the
XXI Century
"
Development
,
Implentation
and
evaluation
of technologies for the treatment and resource recovery from wastewater
NOVEDAR_Consolider
PROJECT
11 research groups
29 relevant companies
14 Authority entities
Knowledge
Acquisition
Technologies
PRETREATMENT AND PRIMARY TREATMENTS
Cyliconcondrical Tank
Settling tanks, digestion / Imhoff Tank
Decantation-digestion of sludge
Recommended population range: 200-900 h.e.
Generation of common odors
Somewhat adaptable to changes in flow / load
Imhoff Tank
Sludge Settling (digestion-stabilization required)
Recommended population range:> 500 h.e.
Generation of common odors
Problems auto-digestion (if poorly sized)
Primary Settlers
Activared Sludge (extended aeration / SBR)
Recommended population range:> 700 h.e.
Adaptable to changes in flow / load
Reduce space requirements
Effluent quality
Nitrification / denitrification (optional)
Capacity Control
High costs (construction and maintenance)
High energy requirements
Need for specialized staff
Activated sludge
Recommended population range: 300 - 2000 h.e.
Adaptability to changes in average flow / load
Low space requirements
Maintenance Costs / moderate exploitation
High construction costs
No nitrification / denitrification
Moderate-low capacity control
Sensitivity to climatic conditions (if found)
Trickling Filter
Recommended population range: 300 - 2000 h.e.
Adaptability to changes in average flow / load
Low space requirements
Moderate maintenance/costs of exploitation
High construction costs
No nitrification / denitrification
Moderate control capacity
Hybrids
Biofilter
Recommended population range: 200-1300 h.e.
Excellent adaptability to changes in flow
High space requirements (approx. 10 m2/he)
Landscape Integration
Low or no energy requirements
Ease of operation / maintenance
Sensitive to conditions / climate change (temperature, fog, etc.)
Sensitive to changes in load and very high loads
Odors Risk if malfunction
Recommended population range: 400-1300 h.e.
Adaptative to changes in flow / load
Media space requirements (4-6 m2/h.e.)
Good Effluent quality
Moderate energy requirements
Sensitive to conditions / climate change (temperature, fog, etc.)
Moderate operating costs
High-Rate Lagoons
Recommended population range: 200-1300 h.e.
Media space requirements (1,2-3 m2/h.e.)
Effluent quality
High Nitrification (> 90%)
Ease of operation / maintenance
Low energy requirements
Sensitive to conditions / climate change (rain, frost. etc.)
Efficiency of treatment related to the selected sand
Clogging problems (lack of maintenance, poor primary system)
Sensible to peak flows
Infiltration-Percolation
Recommended population range: 20-200 h.e.
Mid-low space requirements (2-5 m2/he)
Good Effluent quality
Landscape Integration
Ease of operation / maintenance
Low or no energy requirements
Treatment efficiency related to the selection of the sand
Need for efficient primary systems (clogging problems)
Sensible to peak flows
UV/Photophenton
Recommended population range: 100-400 h.e.
Treatment / disposal system
Adapted to summer population increases (increase of evapotranspiration)
Landscape integration
Possible exploitation of vegetation
Ease of operation / maintenance
Low or no energy requirements
Space requirements very high (20-25 m2/he)
Restrictions in the receiving media (not always suitable terrain, presence of aquifers)
Need for efficient primary system (blocking distribution systems)
Membrane Filtration
Recommended population range: 25-1000 h.e.
Adaptative to changes in flow / load (summer)
Space requirements (2-5 m2/h.e.)
Good Effluent quality
Landscape Integration
Low or no energy requirements
Ease of operation / maintenance
Sensitive to temperature changes
Clogging problems (systems Subsurface horizontal flow) if the elimination of the primary is poor
Lack of design data (vertical flow systems)
Constructed wetlands
Secondary Treatments
Tertiary Treatments
SLUDGE, ODORS AND RETURNS TREATMENTS
Sensitivity / vulnerability
Objectives for quality basins (Doc. DMA)
Treatment Level:
PR (primary)
SE (secundary)
SEN (NH4+ Removal)
TN1/2 (NO3- Reduction)
TNP (Phosphorous Reduction)
Water Framework Directive
The Water Framework Directive (more formally the Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy) is a European Union directive which commits European Union member states to achieve good qualitative and quantitative status of all water bodies (including marine waters up to kilometer from shore) by 2015. It is a framework in the sense that it prescribes steps to reach the common goal rather than adopting the more traditional limit value approach.
Health protection
75/440/EEC concerning the quality required for surface water intended for drinking water production
76/160/EEC and 2006/7/EC (repeals) relating to the management and the quality of bathing water
98/83/EC on the quality of water intended for human consumption
Protection of the aquatic system
78/659/CE on the quality of inland waters needing protection or improvement to be suitable for fish life
79/923/CE on the water quality required for shellfish farming
Products
73/404/CE, detergents biodegrabilitat
Framework Directive
2000/60/EC establishes a framework for Community action in the field of water policy.
2455/2001/CE Decision approves the list of priority substances in the field of water policy (Annex X)
Water Discharge
76/464/CE and 2006/11/EC (repealing) relating to pollution caused by certain dangerous substances discharged into the aquatic environment
80/62/CE on the protection of groundwater against pollution caused by certain dangerous substances
Several
86/278/EEC concerning the protection of the environment and even on the application of sewage WWTP
91/271/EEC and 98/15/EC (Annex 1) concerning urban wastewater treatment
Recommended population range: 300 - 2000 h.e.
Adaptability to changes in average flow / load
Low space requirements
Maintenance Costs / moderate exploitation
High construction costs
No nitrification / denitrification
Moderate-low capacity control
Sensitivity to climatic conditions (if found)
Recommended population range: 20-200 h.e.
Mid-low space requirements (2-5 m2/he)
Good Effluent quality
Landscape Integration
Ease of operation / maintenance
Low or no energy requirements
Treatment efficiency related to the selection of the sand
Need for efficient primary systems (clogging problems)
Sensible to peak flows
Supecritic Oxidation
Validation:

Three
Components
Tools (models)
validation
Knowledge
Tools
EDSS
Knowledge

validation
Information
upgrade
is of the upmost importance

Iterative process
that must be mantain for better resulst
All information and knowledge collected have been (and has to be in
future upgrades
)
referenced

at least from two or more authors
Knowledge or models were refined, adjusted, corrected and/or extended
Example of methodology validation
: Life Cycle Analysis Validation
A
execution
of a series of different trials with
experts
and engineers enable us to
validate
the acquired knowledge and methodologies applied
Case Studies
Nutrient removal
with different influent
C/N
and
C/P
Ratios
Small
Wastewater Treatments
In order to
improve
the
EDSS
the software results were confronted to
real cases
and supervised by
experts
in the wastewater domain
Case study 1
Table
SWWT

Case Study
Characterization of the main existent technologie
s in the wastewater market. Including
emergent
and
conventional
technologies
Enable
to find the most suitable WWTP flowdiagram taking in account many objectives and criteria i.e
environmental social, technical, economical and legal
Generation
the whole
response surface
of possible technologies combinations
Include knowledge obtained from
experts
and
engineers
at the same time than
numerical models
using
AI techniques
Inclusion of
LCA
,
CBA
,
qualitative parameters
,
innovative CBA methodologies
, etc. considering the WWTP as a whole
Reduce the time
in which decisions are made

Improve
the
consistency
and
quality
of the decisions

Allow integration of different
modelling techniques
and different
type of knowledge

Provide direct access to
experience
,
expertise
and
human-kind reasoning

Capable of supporting
AI techniques
and
decision making processes
in
complex situations

Allow the evaluation of different
WWTP alternatives
Conclusions
Conclusions
There is a large number of treatment technologies which
potentially
can be implemented for the very same case
High number of available technologies
The large number of possible
scenarios
and different
objectives
can influence the requirements and affect the design of the plant
Many different objectives, criteria and scenarios
The WWTP has to be
assessed
and
analyzed
from the end of the
sewage system
s until the process related sludge and effluent
final destination
. Not only the bioreactor.
Integrated evaluation of the whole WWTP
The existing interactions among technologies makes difficult the establishment of
compatibilities
amongst the units comprising a wastewater flow diagram
Many possible combinations of technologies
Need to integrate different fields of expertise, from heuristic knowledge (
experts experience
) to determinsitc methods
Include deterministic and heuristic knowledge
NOVEDAR_EDSS
contributions to
XXI
Century
Challenges
in wastewater treatment
NOVEADR_ EDSS
contributions to
XXI
century C
hallenges
Case Studies
Results
Decision Trees are part of a knowledge base (Rolston, 1991; Turban, 1992; and Krishnamoorthy and Rajeev, 1996)
Tab 1
Influent
Information
Data Gathering
Tab 2
Effluent
Information
Tab 3
Sludge
Management
Data Gathering
Tab 4
Criteria
Prioritization
Data Gathering
Tab 5
Economic
Information
Data Gathering
Tab 6
Pathogens
Information
Data Gathering
Tab 7
Emergent Compounds
Information
Data Gathering
In order to
define
the
scenario
the user must introduce:
A
set of WWTP alternatives
that meets the required requirements for the defined scenario are obtained. Later on, the user could combine and change freely the technologies and lines composing the created alternatives to build new ones that fits to its interest
Screen Shoot 9
Wastewater Treatment
Propousals and selection
Decision Support
Screen Shoot 9
Selected PFD
Information
Decision Support
Knowledge bases
combination:
INITIAL-NODE

ATTRIBUTES:
NODE
ATTRIBUTES:
EDGE

ATTRIBUTES:
EDGE

ATTRIBUTES:
END-NODE
ATTRIBUTES
:
Integrated
Assessment
and
Selection
of Innovative Wastewater Treatment Technologies for
Nutrient Removal
Large WWTP
Medium WWTP
Medium-Small WWTP
SWWT
M. Molinos-Senante, M. Garrido-Baserba, R. Reif, F. Hernández-Sancho and M. Poch (2012). Assessment of wastewater treatment plants design for small communities: Environmental and economic aspects. Science of theTotal Environment. 427-428, 11-18.
Tab 8
Life Cycle Analysis
Information
Data Gathering
Screen Shoot 10
Wastewater Treatment
Proposals and selection
Decision Support
Knowledge Bases
E-KBs
(Applicable Legislation; Life Cycle Analysis; Env. Externalities, etc.)
Influent
Efluent
Costs
Impacts
Operation
22
real
WWTPs
Real
plants Inventory
Inventory computed by the
EDSS
The
22 scenarios corresponding
to the
WWTPs
were introduced to the EDSS
22
scenarios
Pair-
comparison
between
real
and
EDSS
LCA
from
real
plants
LCA
by the
EDSS
Level of
information increase
Maximize different objectives at the same time
Large number of
potential solutions
that might be considered to
maximize
the overall
benefits
Eutrophication
Potential
(EP)
Global Warming
Potential
(GWP)
Treating
low-strength
wastewater,
all
the assessed
technologies
were
suitable
, althoug all the options resulted economic feasible

For
moderate/high loads
some technologies
were not adequate
for discharge of the effluent in
sensitive areas

MBRs
and
SBR
achieved the best rank in this case in high load and moderate scenarios respectively. Also, the membrane bioreactor was the
only option
able to produce an effluent suitable for all analyzed scenarios
The
combination
of
environmental
performance and
economic
assessment within the EDSS proved its
usefulness
for the development of feasibility studies that might
justifying
the implementation of technologies aimed to increase the level of
environmental protection
In relation to the
total equivalent cost
, the
extended aeration
process was the
most expensive
technology
whereas

pond systems
were the
cheapest
option

Only three systems
(pond systems, constructed wetlands and intermediate sand filters)
were feasible
with the
conventional CBA
approach
Economic
Vector (CBA)
implementation
into the Novedar_DSS
Cost-Benefit
Analysis (CBA)
Cost-Benefit
Analysis taking into account
environmental externalities
Environmental
Vector
Economic Vector
EDSS
inventory
Emission
and
processes

characterization
factor
Environmental Impacts
expressed as two categories
Provides an efficient management of the large amounts of knowledge required during the process
Reduction of the design problem (Divide-and-conquer type of strategy)
Enables that undesirable technological combinations can be factored out at higher abstraction levels making easier the decision making problem
Data Gathering
To
identify
cases in which the adaption of
measures
to achieve a
good ecological status
for water bodies implies disproportionate costs
WFD is demanding
, especially for those related to the cost recovery for water services,
economic valuation
for WWTP alternatives. Economic valuations are a useful tool for :
The european
Water Framework Directive (WFD)
have emphasized the design and implementation of policies for the efficient management of water resources considering the economic feasibility
To
implement
efficient and effective
strategies
for the management of water resources
The
CBA
is made to compare the
economic feasibility
associated with the implementation of different proposals
CBA methodology
is based on the
net profit
calculation for each one of the available options, which is the
difference
between
benefits
and
costs
(Eq. 1)
NP is the net profit; Bi is the value of the benefit item i and Ci is the value of the cost item i
The
net present value
(NPV) of an
investment
is calculated as a function of the NP and the
discount rate
as shown in Eq. 2
How
to
operate
the Novedar_EDSS?
Video nº2:
Full transcript