WATER ENVIRONMENT RESEARCH FOUNDATION

BIOSOLIDS ODOR EMISSIONS RESEARCH PROGRAM

Lawrence H. Hentz, Jr., P.E. and Brian M. Balchunas, P.E.

PBS&J

12101 Indian Creek Court

Beltsville, MD 20705

Gregory M. Adams and Ron Hargreaves

(Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts)

Jay Witherspoon, P.E., Robert Forbes, P.E. and Sudhir Murthy, Ph.D., P.E. (CH2MHill)

ABSTRACT

This paper reports on the progress of Water Environment Research Federation (WERF)

Project # 00-HHE-5 - Assessment of Municipal and Industrial Odor Sources and Control

Technologies from Collection Systems Through Final Use. The project recently completed a

comprehensive literature review of both published literature and unpublished documents that

examine odor emissions from wastewater treatment plant processes, including collection

systems, pumping stations, wastewater treatment processes, and biosolids processing

facilities. The literature review culminated in the development of a prioritized list of

recommended odor control research. The recommendations were based on gaps in

information and knowledge discovered during the literature review.

Biosolids odor emission research was identified as the highest priority research. Specifically,

research on the influence of upstream treatment processes on biosolids odor quality was

recommended. The influence of storage, anaerobic digestion, bio-available protein, and

polymer addition were examples of parameters that require additional research.

The project team is currently developing protocols for research on the recommended

biosolids investigations. A limited field-based research program is to be conducted during the

summer of 2002. The approach to this research is discussed in this paper.

KEYWORDS

Biosolids, odor, emissions, research, anaerobic digestion, composting, biofilters, sulfides

INTRODUCTION

Since February 2000, the authors of this paper and many other professionals have been

involved in a comprehensive odor control research project that seeks to identify and explore

gaps in knowledge concerning odor issues that affect the wastewater treatment industry.

This project is funded by the Water Environment Research Federation (WERF) and is

referred to as Project # 00-HHE-5 - Assessment of Municipal and Industrial Odor Sources

and Control Technologies from Collection Systems Through Final Use. Participating

consultants and wastewater treatment agencies have provided more than $1 million in in-kind

contributions of time and services for this project.

The odor control research project is comprised of two distinct phases. Phase I included a

comprehensive literature review of both published literature and unpublished documents that

exist within the wastewater treatment industry. The literature review has been completed

and involved the examination of papers associated with nearly all wastewater treatment plant

processes, including collection systems, pumping stations, wastewater treatment processes,

and biosolids processing facilities. The literature review also examined papers from related

industrial facilities and agricultural industry experiences. Table 1 identifies the participants

and their roles in this project.

The key objectives of the literature search were as follows:

Determine chemical constituents of odor emissions from various sources

Determine appropriate odor sampling and measurement for each type of odorant

Evaluate viable odor control technologies and strategies

Compile “lessons learned” for technologies successfully and unsuccessfully applied to

POTWs, industry, and agricultural applications

Identify public perception of odors and viable outreach approaches

Identify “gaps” in knowledge or technologies

APPROACH

Published literature was obtained through a systematic search of various scientific databases.

Task leaders were assigned to each category as shown in Table 1. The task leaders supplied

a list of key words for each of their categories to the University of Texas. The University of

Texas searched the following databases for documents that matched the key words:

Applied Science and Technology Abstracts

Chemical Abstracts Student Edition

Dissertation Abstracts

Engineering Index (Compendex)

Agricola Database

Pollution Abstracts Since the literature base was large and the research team had significant odor emission

knowledge and experience, the literature search was limited to papers published after January

1990. The initial search discovered more than 8,000 papers and article that matched the

keywords. Abstracts for each article and paper were copied into a file and submitted to each

task leader for review. Each abstract was assigned a unique tracking number. The task

leader and associates reviewed the abstract file and flagged documents for retrieval based on

the quality of information in the abstract.

Due to the large number of abstracts discovered, a document tracking spreadsheet was

developed and submitted to each task leader. During the review of the abstracts, each task

leader identified the status of the abstract on the tracking document. Information in the

tracking spreadsheet included: unique tracking number, title, source of information, initials

of reviewer, accept/reject for retrieval purposes, and paper quality rating (A-E). The

tracking spreadsheet was used by the University of Texas to identify documents that were

requested and those that were available for retrieval. Documents that were available were

copied and distributed for review and analysis. Documents that were not available at the

University of Texas were requested from other sources. The quality of the retrieved papers

was evaluated according to the quality and relevance of the information and data presented.

Papers presenting new and peer reviewed data were given preference to less substantiated

documents. Only papers considered to be of the highest quality were summarized for

inclusion in the report.

Gray literature was also solicited for this project. An invitation to provide unpublished

written reports and documents containing pertinent odor data and information was delivered

to 420 members of the WERF, Association of Metropolitan Sewage Agencies (AMSA), and

Air & Waste Management Association (AWMA). The documents received were forwarded

to the respective task leaders and tabulated in a separate tracking spreadsheet. These

documents were also reviewed and evaluated for quality and relevance of the information

presented. Only documents considered to be of the highest quality were summarized for

inclusion in the report.

RESULTS

Table 2 summarizes the number of papers that were identified, retrieved, and reviewed for

each category. As can be seen, more than 5,000 published papers were evaluated during the

literature search. More than 1,000 were requested and nearly 700 were received and

reviewed. The comprehensive results of the literature review have been summarized and

delivered in a final report to the WERF in September 2001. The report is in the process of

being published by the WERF.

This paper summarizes the general Phase I literature findings that are specifically related to

biosolids odor issues. Detailed information can be found in the above-referenced WERF

report. Based on an extensive keyword search, more than 1,300 abstracts associated with

biosolids odor issues were identified and reviewed. Keywords such as odor, biosolids,

sludge, solids, hydrogen sulfide, organic sulfur, and amines were used to identify these

abstracts. Closer examination of the abstracts led to a request for more than 260 papers, as

shown in Table 3. A number of the requested papers could not be retrieved. However, 132

papers were retrieved and reviewed. In addition, 35 gray literature documents were reviewed.

The papers generally covered the subjects summarized below.

General Biosolids Odors

This subject included papers associated with biosolids processing technologies, land

application practices, and landfill disposal. Biosolids processing technologies included

storage, thickening, chemical treatment, and dewatering facilities. Papers dealing with the

origins of biosolids odors and methods for improving the quality of biosolids products were

also included in this subject. All available papers associated with these issues were requested,

and 27 papers were reviewed. Two papers provided comprehensive data on sulfur and

nitrogen emissions from dozens of thickening and dewatering facilities in Europe (Bonnin et

al 1990; Islam et al 1998). Other papers suggested that sulfur and nitrogen emissions

originate from anaerobic digestion of proteins and amino acids (McGrath and Lambert 2000;

Lambert et al 2000; Einarsen et al. 2000, Hentz 1997). Storage of primary and waste

activated sludge for more than 24 hours also promotes the emission of these compounds

(Hentz, 2000).

Composting Odors

This subject included papers associated with composting of biosolids. The literature search

discovered more papers associated with composting odors than any other subject. Thus,

composting appears to be the most studied source of biosolids odors. A review of the

abstracts allowed members of the project team to select papers that might provide objective

data and information concerning compost odor emissions and control technologies. Twenty-

four papers were reviewed. Sulfur and nitrogen compounds were again identified as the

primary odorants for composting emissions (Kryzymein 1999; Van Durme et al 1992; Hentz

et al 1996; Hentz 1992). These papers showed some of the highest concentrations of sulfur

and ammonia originating from composting sources. The papers also showed that many

composting facilities were modified or closed due to odor problems. Thus, composting

literature appears to provide the most concrete example of tangible impacts to the wastewater

treatment industry due to the lack of odor knowledge.

Anaerobic Digestion

This subject included papers associated with odor emissions resulting from anaerobic

digestion of biosolids. In general, very few papers dealt with this subject. As such, all

available papers associated with this subject were requested and reviewed. None of the

received papers were considered high quality papers. Although many papers dealt with

digestion parameters (such as volatile solids destruction, gas production, etc.), most of the

papers only presented anecdotal information on biosolids odor quality resulting from the

anaerobic digestion process. No objective data were presented. Only one paper (Winter and

Duckham 2000) provided objective data which showed that organic sulfides are major

components of odor emissions from anaerobically digested biosolids. Moreover, the paper

showed that anaerobically digested biosolids cakes that are stockpiled can produce more odor

than freshly digested biosolids and the addition of old waste activated sludge can increase

odor emissions from the final product.

The papers in this category also showed that many new digestion processes are in

development and billions of dollars are going to be spent in the near future on anaerobic

digestion facilities. This is because there is a general belief that anaerobic digestion reduces

odor emissions by stabilizing the solids. However not data were found to support this

general belief.

Odor Control Technologies

In general, this subject included papers associated with technologies that seek to reduce odor

emissions from biosolids and biosolids processing facilities. Liquid and vapor phase

treatment technologies were investigated. The vapor phase technologies generally included

point source controls such as scrubbers, biofilters, adsorption scrubbers (activated carbon),

and thermal oxidizers. Most of the papers were associated with biofilters and scrubbers.

Selected papers were requested for these technologies. Since only a few papers dealt with

adsorption and thermal oxidizer technologies, all available papers associated with these

subjects were therefore requested. In total, 37 papers were reviewed in this category.

The quantity and quality of papers associated with biofiltration appears to rival those of

composting. In fact, some papers dealt with both subjects at the same time. In general, the

literature shows that biofiltration is relatively well understood. Moisture, detention time, pH,

porosity, nutrients and media type appear to be key parameters that must be controlled for

effective odor removal (Wani et al 1997; Joyce and Sorensen 1999). If these parameters are

controlled, biofilters can be expected to achieve 90 to 99% removal of hydrogen sulfide and

other odor causing compounds. However, the removal of some species of organic sulfur can

still be a challenge (Amirhor 1995; Goodwin et al 2000).

The literature on liquid scrubbing of odors from biosolids source was relatively poor. There

were few papers associated with biosolids sources and some exhibited a very poor

understanding of the chemical and physical processes that are involved in odor control.

Although many papers showed that organic sulfur compounds are emitted in high

concentration from biosolids source, no papers dealt with removal of organic sulfur

compound by scrubbers. Most papers dealt with scrubbing hydrogen sulfide. A search of

papers relating to mass transfer of organic sulfur compounds was specifically conducted.

However, no good papers were discovered. However, many papers showed that hypochlorite

is the preferred oxidant for biosolids sources (Hentz 1992; Sereno et al 1993; Muirhead et al

1993; Smet et al 1998; Hentz and Balchunas 2000).

Odor Sampling and Analytical Techniques

This subject included papers associated with sampling and analytical methods for qualifying

and quantifying odorous compounds known to be emitted from biosolids and biosolids

processing facilities. In particular, the selected papers were aimed at reviewing analytical

methods for measuring organic sulfur compounds. Papers that covered many types of sources

were reviewed, including sources in the oil and gas industry, food industry, coal industry,

paper industry, and ocean and atmospheric sciences. Thirty-five papers associated with

organic sulfur analysis were reviewed.

The papers showed that most methods for analyzing organic sulfur compounds involve a gas

chromatograph (GC) equipped with a flame photometric detector (FPD) or a mass

spectrophotometer (MS). EPA Methods 15 and 16 describes methods to sample and measure

sulfur in air emissions (40 CFR Part 60, Appendix A). Method 15 is intended for light

molecular weight compounds, such as hydrogen sulfide, carbonyl sulfide, and carbon

disulfide. Method 16 is intended for heavier molecular weight compounds, such as methyl

mercaptan, dimethyl sulfide (DMS), and dimethyl disulfide (DMDS). The method

descriptions indicated that moisture and carbon dioxide interfere with these methods. This is

a problem for biosolids and biosolids processing facilities because these emissions typically

contain large concentrations of these interferents. ASTM Method D 5504-98 also provides

methods for determining individual sulfur-containing compounds in gaseous fuels. This

method uses a sulfur chemiluminescence detector (SCD). This method has a great potential

for the biosolids industry, because it produces a linear respond and not as sensitive to

moisture and carbon dioxide interference. Although the above standard analytical methods

are available to the biosolids industry, few papers referenced these methods. Thus, no

standard method appears to have been adopted by the biosolids industry for sampling and

analytical methods for measuring organic sulfur compounds in air samples.

DISCUSSION

In general, the biosolids literature search revealed many papers associated with composting

and biofiltration. These two subjects provided the most papers and the best papers. Much of

the science associated with biosolids odors appears to be derived from studies associated

with these subjects. On the other hand, papers associated with land application, biosolids

quality, anaerobic digestion, and scrubbing were few and far apart. The few papers associated

with these subjects generally provided anecdotal information and observations. Many of

these papers contained little to no objective odor emission data. In addition, many papers that

dealt with these subjects often showed a lack of understanding of fundamental chemical,

biological, and physical processes.

During the literature search, the biosolids project team became aware that the literature

database did not include papers presented at Water Environment Federation (WEF Specialty

Conferences. Odor specialty conferences have been sponsored by the WEF on several

occasions. Within the time frame of this study, these include conferences at Cincinnati in

2000, at Houston in 1997, and at Jacksonville in 1994. The project team reviewed the

abstracts for these conferences and discovered that only ten of 194 papers presented at these

conferences dealt with biosolids issues. However, thirty papers covered composting and

biofiltration issues, and ten covered scrubbing technologies. The papers involving scrubber

technology dealt mostly with control of hydrogen sulfide from wastewater conveyance and

treatment facilities. Thus, the distribution of papers in these conferences generally followed

the distribution of the overall literature database.

The project team also discovered that the literature database did not include papers presented

at WEF biosolids specialty conferences. The last three biosolids specialty conferences

occurred at Boston in 2000, New Orleans in 1999, and Orlando in 1998. A review of the

abstracts in these conferences also showed a lack of papers associated with biosolids odor

emissions. Only nine of 180 papers contained odor references. Biofiltration and composting

were discussed in four papers, and biosolids processing facilities were discussed in four more

papers. Once again, these conferences showed a lack of papers dealing with biosolids odor

issues.

The absence of WEF specialty conference papers in the literature database concerns the

project team. As shown above, biosolids odor studies are quite limited. The exclusion of this

body of information decreases the availability of the information generated by our own

industry. Thus, the project team made a recommendation to the WERF that the WEF should

remedy this situation as soon as possible.

PHASE II FIELD-BASED RESEARCH

At the 2000 WEFTEC conference in Anaheim, CA, the overall results of the Phase I

literature review and the recommendations for future research were presented to more than

50 attendees at a specialty workshop. The attendees were presented with recommended

research projects for each category and asked to vote for the highest priority research. The

attendees voted biosolids odor issues as the highest priority for future odor research.

Specifically, the attendees wanted research on the influence of upstream treatment processes

on biosolids odor quality. Storage, anaerobic digestion, bio-available protein, polymer

addition were parameters identified as potential influences on overall biosolids odor quality.

The attendees also voted research on biosolids sampling and analytical measurements

techniques as their fourth highest research topic. Thus, the majority of attendees recognized

the need for biosolids odor research.

Since the completion of the Phase I literature search report, the project team has been focused

on developing the approach to the Phase II field-testing program. In general, this phase of

the project seeks to understand the influence of upstream treatment processes on the odor

quality of biosolids products to be land applied. To accomplish this, the odor characteristics

of biosolids will be analyzed as they pass through a variety of treatment processes, which are

designed and operated under a variety of conditions. Since the scope of this project is

financially constrained and there are numerous biosolids treatment processes, this project will

focus on the influence of biosolids storage, anaerobic digestion, and mechanical dewatering

on biosolids odor quality.

Anaerobic digestion was selected as the stabilization process to be studied because many

POTWs have decided that anaerobic digestion has the best chance of producing the least

odorous biosolids product. In addition, new anaerobic digestion processes are being

developed to improve biosolids destruction and pathogen kill. However, there are few

objective odor data in the wastewater industry literature to support the belief that anaerobic

digestion produces the least odorous biosolids product. In fact, anecdotal evidence (reported

in literature) suggests poor digestion and thermophilic digestion might produce more odorous

products (Krugel et al 1998). In addition, there are no objective data to show how anaerobic

digestion system design and operating parameters influence biosolids odor quality.

Thus, this phase of research seeks to collect objective data to demonstrate the influence of

storage, anaerobic digestion, and mechanical dewatering system design and operating

parameters on the odor quality of the final product. Odors and certain chemicals will be

measured in the liquid and gas phases of biosolids before and after storage, anaerobic

digestion, and dewatering. Operations and treatment parameters will be measured

simultaneously to determine the influence of these parameters on biosolids odor quality. By

determining the impacts of these variables on biosolids odor quality, design and operations of

biosolids processing systems might be enhanced.

The general approach will involve collecting gas and liquid biosolids samples from selected

wastewater treatment plants that contain biosolids storage, anaerobic digestion, and

dewatering facilities. The samples will analyzed for certain measurable chemical and odor

quality parameters. Design and operating parameters for the facilities will also be collected.

A multiple regression analysis (such as the Statistical Analysis System) will be used to

determine the degree to which measurable odor quality parameters correlate to the analytical

data and/or design and operating parameters.

A comprehensive testing and sampling protocol is currently being developed to encompass

system operating parameters with monitoring/sampling points at logical locations throughout

the process. Figure 1 and Table 4 identify the current sample locations and analytical

parameters that could be studied at each participating facility. This figure and table identifies

a large suite of samples to be collected and analyzed at each wastewater treatment plant.

This suite of samples and analyses are intended to provide information about changes in

chemical and odor characteristics of biosolids as they proceed through the biosolids treatment

train. Thus, samples will be collected and analyzed before and after each of the biosolids

treatment processes.

Standard analytical methods such as pH, ORP, alkalinity, TKN, total and volatile suspended

solids, etc will be performed in order to provide general information about the chemical

environment in which the biosolids are exposed. For example, the presence of niche

environmental conditions may result in the proliferation of microorganisms that produce

odors. These environmental conditions can be measured using an oxidation-reduction

potential probe.

Standard gas phase analyses such as hydrogen sulfide, organic sulfides, and amines will be

performed in order to determine their relevance to odor, as measure by olfactometric

methods. More sophisticated analytical methods will be used to measure volatile fatty acids,

proteins, amino acids, cations and anions. These measurements will be performed because

these compounds have been implicated in biosolids odor emissions. For example, literature

sources cited above have indicated that protein may be the main source of reduced sulfur and

nitrogen emissions.

It has also been hypothesized that the putrefaction or odor production potential of mesophilic

anaerobically digested biosolids can often be related to the presence of residual biological

activity or substrate. The presence of residual substrate may be a result of digester

performance, which may be affected by process parameters such as detention time,

temperature, mixing, VS destruction, alkalinity, ammonia, and gas production. Thus, these

process parameters will be determined for the digesters that will be sampled in this study.

The presence of degradable substrate (such as labile protein) will also be measured using

colorimetric techniques. The presence of residual biological activity (such as additional VS

destruction) will be determined in the laboratory by measuring the end-products of biological

reactions, such as methane or ammonia.

SUMMARY

At this time, the project team expects to collect large amounts of chemical and physical data

at 7 to 9 wastewater treatment facilities throughout the US and Canada. The final sampling

and analytical protocols are expected to be complete in the spring of 2002. Sample collection

and analysis will likely occur in the summer of 2002. Data analysis and preparation of the

required reports will be performed in the fall and winter of 2002, respectively. Hopefully the

depth and breadth of this study will lead toward the identification of factors that cause and/or

reduce odor emissions from biosolids. If so, this project will make a significant step towards

the production of biosolids materials that emit the least amounts of odor.

REFERENCES

Amirhor, Parviz. 1995. Biofilters and Biosolids. Water Environment & Technology.

7:44-48.

Bonnin, C., A. Laborie, and H. Paillard. 1990. Odor Nuisances Created by Sludge

Treatment: Problems and Solutions. Water Science and Technology. 22 (12) 65-77.

Einarsen, A., M., A. Aesoy, A.I. Rasmussen, S., Bungum, and M. Svebery. 2000. Biological

Prevention and Removal of Hydrogen sulphidr in Sludgre at Lillehammer (Norway)

Wastewater Treatment Plant. Water Science and Technology. 41 (6):53-61

Goodwin, J.P., S.A. Amenta, R.C. Delo, M. Del Vecchio, J.R. Pinnette, and T.S. Pytlar.

2000. Odor Control Advances at Co-composting Facility. Biocycle. 41 (1): 68-72.

Hentz, Lawrence H., Jr., and Al Cassel. 2000a. The Effects of Liquid Sludge Storage on

Biosolids Odor Emissions. Water Environment Federation 14th Annual Residuals and

Biosolids Management Conference.

Hentz, Lawrence H., Jr., and Brian Balchunas. 2000c. Chemical and Physical Processes

Associated with Mass Transfer in Odor Control Scrubbers. Water Environment Federation

Odors and VOC Emissions Specialty Conference.

Hentz, Lawrence H., Jr. 1997. The Chemical, Biological, and Physical Origins of Biosolids

Emissions: A Review. Water Environment Federation Odors and VOC Emissions Specialty

Conference.

Hentz, Lawrence H., Jr., William E. Toffey, and C.E. Schmidt. 1996. Understanding the

Synergy Between Composting and Air Emissions. Biocycle. 37 (3): 67-75.

Hentz, Lawrence H., JR. 1992. Odor Control Research at the Montgomery County

Regional Compost Facility. Water Environmental Research, 64, 13.

Islam, A.K.M.N., Keisuke Honaki, and Tomononi Matsuo. 1998. Fate of Dissolved

Odorous Compounds in Sewage Treatment Plants. Water Science and Technology. 38 (3):

337-344.

Joyce, Jim, and Harvey Sorensen. 1999. Bioscrubber Design: How to Improve Odor-

Control Flexibility and Operational Effectiveness. Water Environment & Technology. 11

(2): 37-41.

Krugel, Steve, Leslie Nemeth, and Craig Peddie. 1998. Extending Themophilic Anaerrobic

Digestion for Producing Class A Biosolids at the Greater Vancouver Regional Districts

Annacis Island Wastewater Treatment Plant. Water Science and Technology. 38 (8-9): 409-

416

Lambert, Stven D., Alan L. Beaman, and Peter Winter. 2000. Olfactometric

Characterisation of Sludge Odours. Water Science and Technology. 41 (6): 49-55.

McGrath, K., E., and S.E. Lambert. 2000. Can Stored Sludge Cake be Deodorised by

Chemical or Biological Treatment? Water Science and Technology. 41 (6): 71-77.

Muirhead, T., P. LaFond, and D. Demnis. 1993. Air Handling and Scrubber Retrofits

Optimize Odor Control. Biocycle. March 1993 68-75.

Sereno, D.J., C.M. McGinley, D.S. Harrison, and R.T. Haug. 1993. Dewatered Sludge

Storage Emissions Control Using Multistage Wet Scrubbing. Water Environment Research.

65 (1) 66-72.

Smet, E., P. Lens, and H. Van Langenhove. 1998. Treatment of Wastew Gases

Contaminated with Odorous Sulfur Compounds. Critical Reviews in Environmental Science

and Technology. 28 (1): 89-117.

Van Durme, Gayle P., Brian F. McNamara, and Charles M. McGinley. 1992. Bench-scale

Removal of Odor and Volatile Organic Compounds at a Composting Facility. Water

Environment Research. 64 (1): 19-27.

Wani, A.H., A.k. Lau, and R. Branion. 1998. Dynamic Behavior of Biofilters Degrading

Reduced Sulfur Odorous Gases. Air & Waste Management Associations 91st Annual Meeting

and Exhibition, June 1998 San Diego California.

Winter, P., and S.C. Duckham. 2000. Analysis of Volatile Odour Compounds in Digested

Sewage Sludge and Aged Sewage Sludge Cake. Water Science and Technology. 41 (6): 49-

55.

Table 1 - Project Organization

Project Management Team

Co-Principal Investigators

Greg Adams/LACSD

Jay Witherspoon/CH2M Hill

Project Engineers

Ron Hagreaves/LACSD

Ting Ong/CH2M Hill

Technical Advisory Committee

Glen Daigger/CH2M Hill

Lawrence Koe/NUS

Tom Mahin/MA-DEP

Chuck Murray/WSSC

Philip Wolstenholme/B&C

Literature Retrieval

Richard Corsi/UT

Felicia James/UT

Project Review Subcommittee

Dr. Michael Jawson/USDA

Allen Hogge/Public Works Dept.

Dr. John Walker, US EPA

Jane Forste/Jane Forste Associates

Dr. Andrew Change/UC/Riverside

Lynn Szabo/DuPont Engineering

Dr. Jerry hatfield/USDA

Dr. Mohammad Abi-Orf/US Filter

Research Task Leaders and Subject Categories

Collection Systems

Rich Corsi

David Kopchynski

Wastewater Treatment

Peter Burrowes

Chris Quigley

Biosolids

Larry Hentz

Sudhir Murthy

Industrial Systems

Tom Card

Agricultural Systems

John Dickey

Public Perception

Linda MacPherson

Supporting Agencies

Alexandria Sanitation Authority

Arlington County WPCP

Central Contra Costa SD

City of Calgary Utilities District

City of Dallas water Utilities

City of Fort Lauderdale

City of Las Vegas WPCF

DC WASA

EBMUD

City of Portland

Green Bay MSD

HRSD

Metropolitan Washington Councils

of Governments

North Shore Sanitary District

Orange County CSD - CA

Philadelphia Water Department

Sacramento Regional CSD

Salt Lake City Reclamation Plant

Union City Sanitation District

WSSC

Table 2 - WERF Phase 1 - Literature Search Results

Cited Requested Retrievable Received

Collect System 355 95 37 37

WW Treat 1,246 349 291 270

Biosolids 1,294 261 162 144

Ind WW 1,073 240 145 127

Agricultural 403 114 68 67

Public Percept 784 59 47 24

TOTALS 5,155 1,118 755 669

Plus 155 gray literature reports

Table 3 - WERF Phase 1 - Biosolids Subjects

Requested Received Quality A or B

Biosolids Odor 57 27 2

Composting 35 24 8

Anaerobic Digest 12 7

Odor Control

Biofiltration 42 20 15

Scrubbers 17 10 3

Adsorption 3 0 0

Thermal 11 7 1

Analytical 80 35 15

TOTAL 261 144

Table 4 - Sample Matrix as a Function of Sample Location

Sample

Type

Needed at

Each

Location

Influent A B C D E F G H I

Sample

Type:

Liquid Liquid Liquid Liquid Liquid Gas Liquid Cake Liquid Cake

Std Methods X X X X X X X X X

Olfactometry

X

H2S X X X X X X

Headspace X X X X X X X X X X

Headspace+ X X X X X X X X X X

VFAs X X X X X X X

Protein X X X X X X X

Organics X X X X X X X X X

Residual

Biological

Activity

X X X

Figure 1. – Example Flow Schematic with Sample Locations.

Figure 1 – Sample Locations

Liquid WAS

Storage

Anaerobic

Digestion

Liquid Primary

Storage

Dewatering

Process

G

F D

C B

A

Conveyance

System I

H

E