In wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs), repair vs. replace considerations are an ongoing dilemma. How much money is it sensible to spend repairing an older piece of equipment vs. upgrading to the best overall replacement option for current operating conditions? Even if the underlying hope is for a quick and easy repair, the answers are not always cut-and-dried. Before making the default decision to repair, evaluate key points that can pay dividends both immediately and over the long run.
As industrial facilities continually look for ways to reduce capital costs and decrease installation timelines associated with water treatment and other systems, the practice of containerizing equipment has become more prevalent. A containerized system offers many benefits of lower costs than comparable field erected buildings, faster timelines, and lower field installation requirements.
In regulated wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) environments, which require 100 percent blower system redundancy to satisfy the most extreme operating conditions, it can be easier to meet demanding physical thresholds than it is to refine energy performance to the ideal minimum. Here are some guidelines for covering all the bases — estimating the potential payback of balancing blower type, size, and turndown capacity while making the evaluation exercise worth the effort.
Providing a suitable environment for microorganisms to treat wastewater is what aerobic treatment units (ATUs) are all about. These advanced systems outshine alternatives on tight lots where there is no room for conventional treatment and on sites with poor soils, shallow vertical separation distances to limiting conditions, and horizontal setback restrictions. Some systems can be designed for the treatment of high-strength wastewater or where total nitrogen removal is required.
For a community to have a clean and dependable water supply, it must build and maintain high-quality drinking water and wastewater infrastructure. While some modernization has been achieved, there is still much work to be accomplished.
Water and wastewater professionals rely on accurate flow measurements for process operation and regulatory compliance. Selecting the best flow meter for each application is essential to obtaining accurate flow data.
Our planet continues to become increasingly more crowded. Pollution and waste are showing irreversible impact on a global scale, and it has become necessary to come up with solutions in all industries. It is widely known, though perhaps not publicly thought of, that the process of purifying water creates waste. As we remove the minerals and impurities from water, we inherently condense those impurities into a smaller body of water. This waste affects the environment in various adverse ways. The solution lies in a concept known as Zero Liquid Discharge (ZLD).
Applied successfully in thousands of water and sewage treatment schemes on all continents, the PISTA® Sand Removal Chamber serves as an efficient choice for sand removal at power generation facility water intakes. In many conventional arrangements, large sedimention basins require significant space and additional chemical usage to help maintain proper settling. The PISTA® Sand Removal Chamber significantly lessens space requirements, while removing 95 percent of surface water intake particles from 300+ microns down to 100 microns. The technology is proven in more than 2,700+ Installations, including at Power Generation Plants.
The advanced oxidation process removes contaminants in water and wastewater by oxidation through reactions with highly reactive hydroxyl radicals (.OH). This chemical process uses ozone (O3), hydrogen peroxide (H2O2), and/or UV light.
The success of a new reverse osmosis (RO) membrane system is often directly related to its pretreatment. The previous section of this article discussed RO design issues and introduced how a pilot study should include a study of its probable pretreatment equipment since the pretreatment performance will directly affect the performance of the RO system. However, piloting the upstream processes can be challenging in sizing these components for the pilot RO unit’s low flow rate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|