4.7 Article

Cost effectiveness of phosphorus removal processes in municipal wastewater treatment

Journal

CHEMOSPHERE
Volume 197, Issue -, Pages 280-290

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2017.12.169

Keywords

Biological phosphorus removal; Phosphorus recovery; Cost of phosphorus removal; WWTP sustainability; Energy requirements; Waste resource recovery

Funding

  1. USDA NIFA Hatch Program [WIS01646, WIS01755]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Meeting stringent phosphorus (P) discharge standards remains one of the major challenges for wastewater utilities due to increased economic burdens associated with advanced (i.e., secondary, tertiary) treatment processes. In a trade-off between higher treatment cost and enhanced P removal, it is critical for the treatment plants to be able to select the most appropriate technology. To this end, established/emerging high performing P removal/recovery technologies (e.g., Modified University of Cape Towne process, Bardenpho process, membrane bioreactors, IFAS-EBPR, struvite recovery, tertiary reactive media filtration) were identified and full-scale treatment plant designs were developed. Using advanced mathematical modeling techniques, six different treatment configurations were evaluated in terms of performance and cost effectiveness ($/lb of P removed). Results show that the unit cost for P removal in different treatment alternatives range from $42.22 to $60.88 per lb of P removed. The MUCT BNR + tertiary reactive media filtration proved to be one of the most cost effective configurations ($44.04/1b P removed) delivering an effluent with total P (TP) concentration of only 0.05 mg/L Although struvite recovery resulted in significant reduction in biosolids P, the decrease in effluent TP was not sufficient to meet very stringent discharge standards. (C) 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available