PECM Issue 20 2016 | Page 63

Catchment Based Thinking to Industrial Wastewater Treatment By Rich Matthews, General Manager, Siltbuster Process Solutions A s part of A P6 the water industry is already taking some steps towards catchment management. Indeed, when it comes to tackling diffuse pollution issues, that threaten the aquatic environment, water companies comfortably adopt such an approach. They adeptly identify the often local, root causes of any problems and mitigate or eliminate them accordingly. Yet, when it comes to industrial wastewater treatment, an area which potentially puts a greater burden on infrastructure, this approach comes less naturally to the sector. Instead, investment decision-making is generally made at the end of pipe’. As a result, efficiencies are missed and problems are not tackled at source. There are a number of compelling reasons why this entrenched way of operating should be over-turned and a catchment-based approach to industrial wastewater treatment should be considered. Unpredictable Problems The first has to be industrial unpredictability and risk. It is e tremely difficult for water companies to predict with certainty how demand from an area’s industrial and commercial base is likely to develop and grow, or to forecast the upside and downside of demand in a specific area. This is a very real problem as, from an operational perspective, apart from storm ows, it is the uctuations in industrial contributions ows and loads that place the greatest stress on the wastewater treatment infrastructure. It’s not ust the treatment facility that is impacted by this; conveyance systems are affected too by industrial demand. Risk to Conveyance Infrastructure A purely centralised approach, where the problem is purely dealt with ‘at the end of the pipe’ also presents an increased risk to conveyance infrastructure in terms of the ows and types of e uents to be catered for. For e ample, significant trade discharges can have high loads that can affect pump stations and other sewerage infrastructure, leading to a greater risk of pollution events. The control of fats, oils and greases (FOG) is a particular focus area and contributor to this. o in essence water companies face a significant potential pressure from their commercial communities, and these communities can e and grow quite unpredictably The use of well-managed Trade uent Consents, and charging by Modgen formula, provide the tools to both control industrial discharges and implement a pricing strategy which ensures revenue for investing in wastewater services. However, where should that investment be best placed? Investing Closer to the Customer This is where we would argue that catchment based thinking comes into its own. SPS has undertaken a number of pro ects with food and drinks companies seeking to improve their discharge compliance performance and / or to reduce their trade e uent charges. ften these systems can be installed as relatively simple retro-fits. ome have even the potential to provide a revenue income; e.g. feedstock for AD plants. Dissolved Air Flotation (DAF) technology has proven time and again to be a cost effective and robust process for reducing organic load into the sewerage system at source; particularly in relation to FOG applications. As an example, the use of a DAF system complete with packaged chemical pre-treatment facility treating wastewater from a ready meals producer, typically achieved an 87% reduction in TSS, and a 70% reduction in of COD. Furthermore, since this packaged treatment system has been installed it has treated ~120,000 m3, with a gross saving of circa £50,000 in Mogden charges since October 2014. However, more importantly this has significantly reduced the demand on the existing conveyance and treatment infrastructure At present it is the proactiveness of industrial customers in managing their operation and expenditure that drives this approach. However, given the potential reduction in both the load and the associated stresses on infrastructure, water companies should perhaps themselves look at how some of their assets can be better deployed by treating at source. Of course there may be scenarios where the traditional end of pipe solution is the right one. We also acknowledge that the catchment approach to industrial water treatment requires a significant shift in the water sector’s investment model. Primarily in the operational philosophy outlook and responsibility, by treating solutions on third party land and the additional interfaces. However, with engineering, construction and space constraints increasingly inhibiting the sustainable development of wastewater treatment sites, we really believe higher rate, smaller footprint, intensive treatment processes, working where the problem originates present a real answer. The change in approach will deliver enough significant benefits to merit this shift in thinking. For further information on Siltbuster Process Solutions, please visit www.siltbuster.com, call 01600 772256 or email [email protected] Issue 20 PECM 63