This presentation is aimed at high-strength wastewaters which is herein defined as organic in nature, requiring carbon and nutrient removal to a designated level of quality. The wastewaters result from raw product/final product/co-product carryover in washwater from production systems. Prime sources are food processing, brewing and distilling, soft drinks, agricultural slurries and run-offs, digestion sideflows, landfill leachates pharma-biopharma wastewaters may now be included in this category. Points of relevance in assessing high-strength wastewaters: • Concentrations in a volume may relate to organic carbon, nutrients or both. • The process evaluation should be biased by relative biodegradability, biochemistry and, where relevant, by Biochemical Methane Potential (BMP). • Typical high-strength wastewaters may vary from 1,000mg/l COD up to 100,000mg/l COD and the nutrient ratios and treatability require inclusion. • Readily biodegradable COD as an indicator of reaction rate and enzyme/co-enzyme activity. • Trend curves relating to inhouse production to emission over the periods and phases of production are an advantage. • Proper pre-conditioning is necessary for all relative assessments. • Sustainability analysis may be carried on existing plants after a detailed site/process survey including an energy audit. • Alternative designs should be considered using comparative carbonation (CF Diligence) analysis to identify the optimum solution.

1. Sustainable
Design for
High Strength
Wastewaters

2. About WEW
C O N S U LT I N G E N G I N E E R S
WAT E R | E N E R G Y | WA S T E WAT E R
• 40 years’ experience with involvement in 500 PLUS projects.
• WEW team: chemist, chartered engineers, Process and Plant
Design Specialists.
• Specialities include Process, Mechanical, Electrical,
Instrumentation and Automation/SCADA Engineering.
• Services: Detailed Engineering, Preliminary Design, Design
Development, Plant Upgrades, Water Treatment, Wastewater
Treatment, Waste to Energy Projects, Energy and
Sustainability Audits.
• 3D Modelling and Drawings.

3. Objectives
• Implement: Proactive Implementation
• Carbon Footprint reduction
• Ultimately carbon neutrality
• Minimisation of Greenhouse Gasses
• Minimise “Excess solids/liquids”
• Utilise biology/biochemistry of C,N,P,
• Minimise imported energy
• Maximise Green Energy/Bioenergy

4. Sustainability Cycle - Climate Change
• Cradle-to-Cradle (C2C) preferred to life
cycle assessment (LCA)
• Greenhouse gas reduction / co-product
recovery
• Carbon footprint reduction methods
• Sustainable Masterplans at Group level
• Commercial validation applies in all cases
• Ergonomic mass balances
• Balance of nature
• Definite change of concepts required

5. Sustainability – Water/Wastewater
• “Wastewaters” are by-products for
further use, not disposal
• Renewables asset recovery:
bio-nutrients
• Spent ash treatment/recovery
• Bio-energy production using AD via
steam or CHP cogeneration
• Water footprint control/Water
stewardship
• Carbon neutrality/minimum unusable by
product
• Professional Ethics must change

6. Fundamental sustainability criteria
Carbon, Nitrogen, Phosphorus, Water Cycles
Wastes: Solid & Liquid: Recycle/Capture
Energy potential of renewable feedstocks
Excess sludges (biological/chemical)
Soil nutrients, biocide and pesticide level
Advanced Wastewater Treatment – Re-Use

7. High Strength Wastewaters
• Concentrations in a volume may relate to
carbon or nutrients
• Fundamentals - biodegradability, Biochemical
Methane Potential (BMP), reaction rates, ratios
• <1,000mg/l COD up to >100,000mg/l COD
• Trend curves relating production to emission
• Proper pre-conditioning is necessary
• Sustainability analysis for existing plant
upgrades
• site energy audit a necessary
• State-of art upgrades require capitalised cost
analysis
• Optimum upgrade uses BAT
Milk
Processing
Meat
Processing
Brewing Distilling
SOURCES

8. Characteristics
Source COD TSS COD/TKN COD/PO4
Mg/l Mg/l
Milk Processing 3,000 600 18 10
Meat Processing 3,500 2,000 17.5 19
Brewing 5,500 1,000 67 110
Distilling 35,000 1,500 11 175
Some important fundamentals:
• Always relate to Production source(s)
• Aim to maximise concentration- low volumes for mainstream treatment
• Complete surveys/Trend curves
• Allow modulating buffer for process and installed capacity
• Quoted values are but indicators and each application is self defining

9. Treatment Works Design
Conventional v Sustainable
Conventional Designs
• Designs were based on proven conventional technology, proven but primarily to
minimize capital cost
• Prime objective minimized capital cost, energy as a secondary concern
• Now mainly outdated and not providing full sustainability
Sustainable Design Objectives
• Further use of microbiology to minimize energy and external chemical conditioning
• Minimise SOR by sequencing/modulation/automation
• Process adaptation to utilize low DO bacterial activity
• AD for carbon reduction, bio-energy with reduced imported energy – so reducing CF
• Develop and apply updated systems for bio nutrient (N and PO4 removal)
Due Diligence Design Assessments
• Viable alternatives must be adequately detailed
• Full cost analysis on each based-on Capex and Opex based on capitalized costings
• Optimum system available is concluded

10. Due Diligence Evaluation
Sustainable Design Attractions
• Sludges reduced to <10% of equivalent aerobic process (EAS) without
nutrient loss
• Aeration costs reduced from 100% using conventional systems down to 15%
- 20%
• Above figures may vary if pre-treatment pre digestion is necessary
• Judicious design of downstream polishing to produce desired quality is
required
• On-line control without over-complication ensures energy modulation
• Lead objective ‘provide biotreatment at irreducible minimum cost’
• Additional capex versus ongoing Opex should allow for legal regulations of
BAT and Climate change

11. Mainstream Energy Recovery
Reference Project AA: Dairy Processing
Loading
27,000 kgCOD/d
% COD Removal
across AD: 93%
Biogas
Production 6,700
Nm3/d
Tot. Bio-energy
44,000 kwhrs/d
Reduced External
SOR: 16,000 kg/d
Final Quality
10/10/15/0.4
Digestor Choice
Conventional
Reduced Aeration
Energy: 40%
Reduced Excess
Biological Sludge:
93%

12. Mainstream Energy Recovery
Reference BB Whiskey Distilling
Loading
2800 kg COD/d
COD Removal
across AD 85%
Biogas
1,260 m3/d
Tot.Bio-Energy
8,450 kwhrs/d
Reduced External
SOR 4,400kg/d
Final Quality
10/10/15/0.5
Digester Choice
High - Rate
Reduced External
Energy 85%
Reduced Excess
Biological Sludge
80 %

13. Mainstream Energy Recovery
Reference CC : Fish Processing
Loading
11,000 kg COD/d
COD Removal
across AD 82%
Biogas
3,300m3/d
Tot.Bio-Energy
22,000 kwhrs/d
Reduced
External SOR
4,400kg/d
Final Quality
10/10/15/0.5
Digester Choice
High - Rate
Reduced
External Energy
82%
Reduced Excess
Biological
Sludge 80 %

14. Conclusion
• Practitioners must aspire to sustainable
practises to minimise climate change
• Process design and material selection must
reduce carbon footprint and minimise GHG
emission.
• Wastewater designs must be more eco-
friendly with less reliance on oxygen, external
energy and chemicals
• High strength wastewaters allows anaerobic
technology on mainstream flows
• Post AD treatment is an integral part of the
sustainable answer for full treatment
• Conversion of outdated processes and plants,
is a major practical challenge
• R&D is likely to apply mainstream technology
for lower concentrations

15. AD Plants Worldwide
• 50 M micro-digesters
• 42 M of those are in China mainly used for
cooking & heating
• 132k small, medium and large-scale digesters
• 110k of those are in China
• 18k in Europe
• 2k in USA
• 150 in Ireland, north & south (Most are in the
north)
• Ireland is behind the UK and most European
countries in terms of the development and
installation of Anaerobic Digester Systems with
Renewables recovery

16. Thank You.
Seamus Crickley
087-2224768
scrickley@weweng.ie
www.wewengineering.ie