Anda di halaman 1dari 109

A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF SEWERAGE TREATMENT PLANTS WITH DIFFERENT TECHNOLOGIES IN THE VICINITY OF CHANDIGARH CITY

A DISSERTATION
SUBMITTED TO THE PANJAB UNIVERSITY, CHANDIGARH IN THE PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE AWARD OF THE DEGREE OF

MASTER OF ENGINEERING IN ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING

SUBMITTED BY PRERNA SHARMA POST GRADUATE ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT PEC UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY CHANDIGARH 160012 2013

CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that the thesis entitled A comparative study of sewerage treatment plants with different technologies in the vicinity of Chandigarh which is being submitted herewith by Prerna Sharma (Roll no. 11201009) in partial fulfillment for the award of the degree of Master of Engineering (Environmental Engg.) of PEC University of Technology Chandigarh is an authentic record of the students own work carried out under our supervision and guidance. The matte r presented in the thesis has reached the standards fulfilling the requirements of the regulation for the award of said degree.

Dr. R.K Khitoliya Professor and Head Deptt. Of Civil Engineering PEC University of Technology Chandigarh

Dr. Shakti Kumar Associate Professor Deptt. Of Civil Engineering PEC University of Technology Chandigarh

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The present shape of this study has come forth only after contribution from different spheres. Had this encouragement and support not been forth coming, it would have been extremely difficult to complete the thesis work in time. I acknowledge my sincere thanks to my main guide Dr. R.K. Khitoliya, Professor and Head, Deptt. Of Civil Engineering, PEC, Chandigarh for his continuous support in my thesis work. Mere words can never encompass the profound gratitude. I feel for his guidance, valuable critism and constant inspiration that never let me waver during the course of my thesis. I am also highly thankful to my Co-Guide Dr. Shakti Kumar, Associate Professor, Civil Engineering department, Chandigarh without whose timely help and suggestions my thesis work would never have been possible. I express my sincere thanks to him for providing me the necessary guidance throughout my thesis work. I would like to thank Mr. Harish Kumar Saini, S.D.O, Sewerage Treatment Plant, Diggian, Mohali and Sewerage Treatment Plant Raipur Kalan for providing access to these plants and for providing me the information i needed. I own my special thanks to Mr. Pandey, Scientist, Chandigarh Pollution Control Committee for providing relevant information regarding my thesis work. I am very thankful to Mr. Baljeet Singh, Mr. Bhardwaj and Mr. K. S. P Rana for providing a pleasant atmosphere and necessary facilities in the laboratory. Last but not the least, i am deeply grateful to my beloved parents for their moral support, love and encouragement without which it would not have been possible to reach this stage of my life.

Prerna Sharma
II

III

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE NO. 1.1

CONTENTS Comparison between Raipur Kalan, Raipur Khurd and Mohali STP

PAGE NO. 10

3.1

Parameters and Methods for their Analysis

34

Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) General Standards for the discharge of 3.2 Environmental Pollutants according to The Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986 49

Schedule-VI PartA : Effluents

4.1

Characteristics of Influent and Effluent of all the 3 STPS in the month of FEB

54

4.2

Characteristics of Influent and Effluent of all the 3 STPS in the month of MARCH

55

4.3

Characteristics of Influent and Effluent of all the 3 STPS in the month of APRIL

56

III

4.4

Average Characteristics of Influent and Effluent of all the 3 STPS

57

4.5

Comparison of all the three STPs Effluent with CPCB Effluent Discharge Standards into Inland Surface Water Overall Performance or Removal/Reduction Efficiency of all the 3 STPs Comparison of Mohali STP, (MBBR) Technology, Average Effluent With the

63

4.6

66

4.7

CPCB Effluent Discharge Standards into Land for Irrigation

72

IV

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE NO. 1.1

CONTENTS Typical Stages in the Conventional Treatment of Sewage General diagram showing various parts of an Sewerage Treatment Plant Tube Chip Shaped Bio-Carriers Flow diagram showing MBBR technology at STP Diggian, Mohali Flow diagram showing UASB technology at STP Raipur Kalan Flow diagram showing ASP technology at STP Raipur Khurd pH apparatus Digital Thermometer Soxhlet Apparatus Glass Fibre Apparatus for TSS BOD Incubator Spectrophotometer Spectrophotometer Showing Standard Curve Graphical Representation of pH of all the 3 STPs
V

PAGE NO. 2

1.2

1.3

1.4

1.5

1.6 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 4.1

9 35 36 38 40 42 45 46 58

4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 4.8 4.9 4.10 4.11

Graphical Representation of Temperature of all the 3 STPs Graphical Representation of TSS of all the 3 STPs Graphical Representation of TDS of all the 3 STPs Graphical Representation of Oil and Grease of all the 3 STPs Graphical Representation of BOD of all the 3 STPs Graphical Representation of COD of all the 3 STPs Graphical Representation of Cl- of all the 3 STPs Graphical Representation NO3-N of all the 3 STPs Graphical Representation of NH3 N of all the 3 STPs Graphical Representation of of PO4- OF all the 3 STPs Graphical representation of Parameter exceeding CPCB Standard Graphical representation of TSS for Overall Performance or Removal/Reduction Efficiency of 3 all the STPs Graphical representation of TDS for Overall Performance or Removal/Reduction Efficiency of 3 all the STPs

58 59 59 60 60 61 61 62 62 63

4.12

65

4.13

67

4.14

68

VI

4.15

Graphical representation of COD for Overall Performance or Removal/Reduction Efficiency of 3 all the STPs

69

4.16

Graphical representation of BOD for Overall Performance or Removal/Reduction Efficiency of 3 all the STPs

70

4.17

Graphical representation of BOD for Overall Performance or Removal/Reduction Efficiency of 3 all the STPs

71

VII

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

BOD COD FIG CPCB mg/L TDS TSS NO3 -N NH3 N ClPO4Temp MPN STP ASP UASB MBBR
C

Biochemical Oxygen Demand Chemical Oxygen Demand Figure Central Pollution Control Board Milligram Per Litre Total Dissolved Solids Total Suspended Solids Nitrate Nitrogen Ammonia Nitrogen Chloride Phosphate Temperature Most Probable Number Sewerage Treatment Plant Activated Sludge Process Upflow Anaerobic Sludge Blanket Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor Degree Celsius

VIII

ABSTRACT
Chandigarh city has a well planned underground network of pipes for the disposal of sewerage generated in the city. The sewerage system of the city has been designed by taking into account the natural slope of the city, which is from north to south. Chandigarh city hosts three Sewerage Treatment Plants (STPs) namely: STP Diggian located at sector 66 of S.A.S Nagar, Punjab Territory, Mohali, based upon MBBR (Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor) technology which is at a distance of about 4km from the nearest planned sector 47, STP Raipur Kalan located at a distance of 6km from Chandigarh adjoining to railway station based upon UASB (Upflow Anaerobic Sludge Blanket) technology and STP Raipur Khurd, based upon ASP (Activated Sludge Process) technology located on Chandigarh-Ambala highway at a distance of approximately 8 km from Interstate Bus Terminal sector 17, 1 km from Airport and 3 km from Railway Station. These plants are designed and constructed with an aim to manage waste water so as to minimize or remove organic matter, solids and other pollutants before it enters a water body. In the present study various Physico-Chemical and Biological Parameters are evaluated and are compared with the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) General Standards for the Discharge of Environmental Pollutants PartA : Effluents, into Inland Surface Water according to The Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986 Schedule-VI because the Effluent from these

STPs enters river Ghaggar. Also the performance of each STP was evaluated in terms of Removal/Reduction Efficiency. Since out of 30 MGD of STP, Mohali 10 MGD treated waste water is reused for Irrigation purpose in various gardens and lawns of Sector : 19, 20, 21, 29, 30, 33, 34, 36, 40, 42, 43, 44, 46, 47, 48, 51 and 52 of Chandigarh city therefore Average Effluent of this STP is compared with the CPCB Effluent Discharge Standards into Land for Irrigation.

It was observed according to the results obtained that BOD value of the Effluent of STP Raipur Kalan and Raipur Khurd was not under permissible limit during the duration of study and Average Phosphate value of Raipur Khurd was exactly upto permissible limit according to Central Pollution Control Board

IX

(CPCB) General Standards for the Discharge of Environmental Pollutants Part A: Effluents, into Inland Surface Water according to The Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986 Schedule-VI. According to the results obtained it was also revealed that all the Physico-Chemical and Biological Parameters evaluated for STP Mohali was under permissible limit according to CPCB Effluent Discharge Standards into Land for Irrigation and also into Inland Surface water. Also it was revealed from the performance study that efficiency of the three STPs mentioned above was poor with respect to removal of TDS (Total Dissolved Solids) in contrast to the removal /reduction efficiency in other parameters like TSS (Total Suspended Solids), BOD (Biochemical Oxygen Demand) and COD (Chemical Oxygen Demand). The order of removal/reduction efficiency was 1.TDS(39%) 2.COD(56%) 3.TSS(76%) 4.BOD(79%), 1.TDS(46%) 2.TSS(51%) 3.BOD(73%) 4.COD(78%) and 1.TDS(55%) 2.COD(75%) 3.TSS(78%) 4.BOD(88%) respectively in Raipur Kalan STP, Raipur Khurd STP and Diggian Mohali STP. In comparison with each other, out of the three STPs, Diggian STP Located at Mohali showed better results for the effluent, its reduction efficiency for BOD is 88% and is highest among Raipur Kalan STP and Raipur Khurd STP which is 79% and 73% respectively. From the evaluation it is further revealed that Mohali STP based upon MBBR technology have more stable results than Raipur Kalan STP, based upon UASB technology and Raipur Khurd STP, based upon ASP technology. The order of overall performance for the technologies studied in different STPs are: 1.MBBR 2.UASB 3.ASP which proves that MBBR technology is ahead to UASB and ASP technology in the treatment of sewage. Additionally, the working principle, problems associated with the operation and maintenance of all the three STPs is also discussed.

CONTENTS

CERTIFICATE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT LIST OF TABLES LIST OF FIGURES LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ABSTRACT

I II III V VIII IX

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 1.2 General 30 MGD Sewerage Treatment plant, DIGGIAN based upon MBBR technology, at sector 66 S.A.S Nagar, Phase 11, Mohali 5 MGD sewerage treatment plant based upon UASB technology at Raipur Kalan, Chandigarh 1.25 MGD Sewerage Treatment Plant based upon ASP technology at Raipur Khurd, Chandigarh Objectives of the study 1 4

1.3

1.4

1.5

11

1.6

Significance of the study

11

CHAPTER 2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE

2.1

The innovative Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor/ solids contact reaeration process for secondary treatment of municipal wastewater

12

2.2 2.3 2.4

Biological Fixed Film Systems The Moving Bed Bio film Reactor Treatment of pesticide wastewater by Moving-Bed Biofilm Reactor combined with Fenton-coagulation pretreatment

12 13 13

2.5

Performance comparison of a pilot-scale UASB and DHS system and activated sludge process for the treatment of municipal wastewater

14

2.6

Efficiency evaluation of sewage treatment plant with different technologies in Delhi (India)

14

2.7

Treatment of domestic wastewater in an Up-Flow Anaerobic Sludge Blanket reactor followed by Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor

15

2.8 2.9

Assessment of the efficiency of Sewerage Treatment Plants Performance Evaluation of Moving Bed Bio-Film Reactor Technology for Treatment of Domestic Waste Water in Industrial Area at MEPZ (Madras Exports Processing Zone), Tambaram, Chennai, India

16 16

2.10 2.11

Biofilms in Water and Wastewater treatment A review: The anaerobic treatment of sewage in UASB and EGSB Reactors

16 17

2.12

Comparison of overall performance between "Moving-Bed" and "Conventional" Sequencing Batch Reactor

18

2.13

Anaerobic sewage treatment in a one-stage UASB reactor and a Combined UASB-Digester system

18

2.14

Performance evaluation of a UASB activated sludge system treating municipal wastewater

19

2.15

Combined Anaerobic/Aerobic Secondary Municipal Wastewater Treatment: Pilot-Plant Demonstration of the UASB/Aerobic Solid Contact System

20

2.16

Improvements in Biofilm Processes for Wastewater Treatment

21

2.17 2.18

Fluidized Bed Biofilm Reactor for wastewater treatment Integrated application of Upflow Anaerobic Sludge Blanket Reactor for the treatment of wastewaters

22 23

2.19

Potential of a Combination of UASB and DHS Reactor as a Novel Sewage Treatment System for Developing Countries: Long-Term Evaluation

23

2.20 2.21

A review of the upflow anaerobic sludge blanket reactor Removal of Slowly Biodegradable COD in Combined Thermophilic UASB and MBBR Systems

24 25

2.22 2.23

Technical review on the UASB process Wastewater Treatment in Baghdad City Using Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor (MBBR) Technology

26 27

2.24

The performance enhancements of Upflow Anaerobic Sludge Blanket (UASB) reactors for domestic sludge treatment A State of the art review

28

2.25 2.26 2.27 2.28

Treatment of raw domestic sewage in an UASB reactor Upgrading Activated Sludge Systems and reduction in excess sludge Developments in wastewater treatment methods Microbial attachment and growth in Fixed-Film Reactors: Process startup considerations

28 29 29 30

2.29 2.30

Small wastewater treatment plants: A challenge to wastewater engineers Sustainable options of post treatment of UASB effluent treating sewage: A review

31 31

CHAPTER 3 MATERIALS AND METHODOLOGY 3.1 Selection of Sites and Sampling Points 3.2 Collection of Samples 3.3 Parameters Analyzed 3.4 Methods for Analysis 33 33 33 35

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS 4.1 Results 4.2 Discussions 54 73

CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 5.1 Conclusions 5.2 Recommendations 5.3 Future Scope of Work 84 85 86

REFERENCES

88

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 General

In early days waste products of the society including human excreta were been collected, carried & disposed of manually by the human beings and this system is called dry conservancy system. This system leads to bad smell and health hazard. Now a day with the march of civilization & development proper disposal of waste done by a new system called sewerage system that had replaced the old dry conservancy system. In the sewerage system, the waste mixed with water is called sewage. Sewage carried through close pipes or lines called sewers to the place away from the residential area under the force of gravity to Sewerage Treatment Plant (STP). Here sewage treated before disposing in environment. Sewage includes dissolved and suspended organic solids, number of living microorganism, which lead into bad condition, odour and appearance. Microorganism may contain disease-producing (pathogenic) bacteria and viruses that can be readily transferred by sewage from sick individuals to well ones. So by removing it properly environment can be maintained in an acceptable and safe condition. State and Local authorities with statutory authority in pollution control have established standards of purity that are necessary to prevent pollution of natural waters. When waste is discharged into controlled amount, the standards set by State and Local authorities are maintained. Domestic sewage consists of waste from toilets, lavatories, urinals, bathtubs, showers, home laundries and kitchens. It also includes similar wastes from medical dispensaries and hospitals.

Treatment Methods Generally Followed at an STP


Sewerage Treatment Plant is a facility designed to receive the waste from domestic, commercial and industrial sources and to remove materials that damage water quality and compromise public health and safety when discharged into water receiving systems. It works on the objective to allow human, domestic and industrial effluents to be disposed of without danger to human health or unacceptable damage to the natural environment. Conventional wastewater treatment consists of a combination of physical, chemical, and biological processes and operations to remove solids, organic matter and nutrients from wastewater.
1

Fig 1.1: Typical stages in the Conventional Treatment of Sewage

Fig 1.2: General diagram showing various parts of a Sewerage Treatment Plant

1.2

30 MGD Sewerage Treatment Plant, DIGGIAN based upon MBBR Technology, at Sector 66 S.A.S Nagar, Phase 11, Mohali

This Sewerage Treatment Plant, spread over an area of 48 acres, is located at Sector 66 of S.A.S. Nagar in Punjab Territory which is at a distance of about 4 km from the nearest planned Sector 47. The present capacity of the Sewerage Treatment Plant is 30 MGD. The sewage received at this STP is subjected to primary, secondary and tertiary treatment. 30 MGD is treated upto tertiary level and out of 30 MGD, 10 MGD treated waste water or sewage is recycled back to the city for irrigation of open spaces/ gardens. The 20 MGD treated sewage is disposed off in an open Nallah and finally it meets river Ghaggar.

The main components of STP DIGGIAN, Mohali Primary Treatment Components (MBBR Technology)
1. Raw Sewage Sump : 4 2. Inlet Channel 3. Settling Chamber 4. Mechanical Screens : 4 5. Grid Separators : 4

Secondary Treatment Components


1. 2. 3. Fluidized Aerobic Bioreactor Media MBBR units (Moving Bed Bio Film Reactors) : 2 (MBBR-I and MBBR- II) Claritube settlers: 2

Tertiary Treatment Components


1. 2. Disinfection (Chlorine contact), Chlorine Contact Tank : 1 Filtration: Dual filter Media, one coconut shell filter media & other coarse fine aggregates as the other media.

Fig. 1.3: Tube Chip Shaped Bio-Carriers used in MBBR technology


The above Fig shows tube chip shaped bio-carriers .The bio-carriers were made of organic polymer (high density polyethylene) that was mixed with nano sized inorganic ingredients (cokes powder, zeolite and so on); the nano-sized inorganic ingredients were purposely mixed to enlarge the surface area and roughness of the carrier for microorganism better accommodation.

Fig 1.4: Flow diagram showing MBBR technology at STP Mohali

1.3

5 MGD Sewerage Treatment Plant based upon UASB Technology Raipur Kalan, Chandigarh

STP Raipur Kalan is located at a distance of 6km from Chandigarh adjoining to railway station and is based upon UASB (Upflow Anaerobic Sludge Blanket) technology.

The main components of STP Raipur Kalan (UASB Technology)


1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Inlet channel Inlet chamber Mechanical screens Manual Screen Grit Channel Parshal Flume Collection Chamber Divison Box Distribution Box : : : : : : : : 2 1 2 2 1 1 4 2

10. UASB Reactor 11. Final Polishing Unit 12. Sludge Drying Beds

Fig 1.5: Flow diagram showing UASB technology at STP Raipur Kalan

IINLET CHANNEL

INLET CHAMBER

SCREENS

GRIT CHANNEL

PARSHAL FLUME

COLLECTION CHAMBER

DIVISON BOX

DISTRIBUTION BOX

UASB REACTORS

EFFLUENT CHANNEL

SLUDGE WITHDRAWAL PIT

FINAL POLISHING UNIT

SLUDGE DRYING BEDS 8

1.4

1.25 MGD Sewerage Treatment Plant base upon ASP Technology at Raipur Khurd, Chandigarh

STP Raipur Khurd, based upon ASP (Activated Sludge Process) technology is located on Chandigarh-Ambala highway at a distance of approximately 8 km from Interstate Bus Terminal sector 17, 1 km from Airport and 3 km from Railway Station, Chandigarh.

The main components of STP Raipur Khurd (ASP Technology)


1. Raw sewage Sump : 4 2. Inlet Channel :1 3. Mechanical Screens : 2 4. Grit Channel : 1 5. Aeration Tanks : 6 6. Secondary Sedimentation Tank: 1 7. Sludge Drying Beds

Fig 1.6: Flow diagram showing ASP technology at STP Raipur Khurd
IINLET CHANNEL

MECHANICAL SCREENS

GRIT CHANNEL

AERATION TANKS

SECONDARY SEDIMENTATION TANK

SLUDGE DRYING BEDS

FINAL EFFLUENT

Table 1.1: Comparison between Raipur Kalan, Raipur Khurd and Mohali STP
MOHALI STP (FAB/MBBR TECHNOLOGY) Aerobic, Attached growth High. Higher loads can be 2. Expandability Very Limited Very Limited accepted with extra media Filling. 3. Area required for STP, in hectares Total land cost, Rs. Lacs Total power 5. cost/annum, Rs. Lacs 1.77 47.56 36.5 3.825 2.925 0.5575

S.NO

PARAMETERS

RAIPUR KALAN STP (UASB TECHNOLOGY) Anaerobic

RAIPUR KHURD STP (ASP TECHNOLOGY) Aerobic

1.

Type of process

4.

45.9

35.1

6.69

Maintenance cost per annum, Rs. 6. Lacs (Including manpower, power, chemicals) 7. Capital Cost, Rs. Lacs 600 Manimajra township, 8. Source of sewage Modern Housing Complex,Shivalik Enclave and Mauli Jagran Colony 922.5 Raipur Khurd, Hallomajra, Behlana, Makhnanmajra and Daria village 585 Sector 20,21,43,44,47,48, 36,50,51,52,49,61,62,64,8 0,81,83 of Chandigarh city 72.47 156.03 47.71

10

1.5 Objectives of the Study


1. To analyze the physico-chemical parameters of influent and effluent of all the three STPs studied. 2. To study the biological parameters of influent and effluent of all the three STPs. 3. To determine the Nutrient Load in each of the STP studied. 4. To determine the intensity and variation of pollution level in each of the STP studied. 5. To know practically about the working principle of all the three STPs studied. 6. To determine the overall performance of each STP in terms of removal/reduction efficiency.

1.6 Significance of the Study


Proper treatment should be given to sewage in Sewerage Treatment Plant before their disposal into inland surface water or for reuse of sewage effluent for irrigation purposes. My study on the above three STPs is done to check whether the effluent from the three STPs studied complies with the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) General Standards for the discharge of environmental pollutants Part A: Effluents, into Inland Surface Water according to The Environment (Protection) Rules,1986 Schedule-VI , because the effluent from these STPs meet the river Ghaggar i.e the source of Inland Surface Water. Also this study will help us to know that among ASP, MBBR and UASB which technology is better for the treatment of sewage and producing effluent of good quality.

11

CHAPTER 2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE

2.1 Fluidized Bed Biofilm Reactor for wastewater treatment


Wen K. Shieh and John D. Keenan (1986) found that the fluidized bed biofilm reactor (FBBR) represents a recent innovation in biofilm processes. Immobilization of microorganisms on the small, fluidized particles of the medium results in a high reactor biomass holdup which enables the process to be operated at significantly higher liquid throughputs with the practical absence of biomass wash-out. The process intensification (i.e., a reduction in process size while maintaining performance) achieved in FBBRs makes this innovative technology particularly attractive in biological wastewater treatment, commercial biomass conversion, and ethanol and biochemical production applications. In this chapter, the present understanding of biofilm phenomena involved in the operation of FBBRs is reviewed. Special emphasis is placed on the microbial and kinetic aspects of FBBRs and practical design considerations and current applications are described.

2.2 Treatment of raw domestic sewage in an UASB reactor


R.A. Barbosa and G.L. Sant'Anna Jr (1989) carried out a study in which the treatment of raw domestic sewage at ambient temperatures in an upflow anaerobic sludge blanket (UASB) reactor with a volume of 120 l. and a height of 1.92 m was studied. The sewage had an average BOD 5 of 357 mg l1 and COD of 627 mg l1. Approximately 75% of the organic materials were in the suspended fraction. The sewage temperature ranged from 18 to 28C during the experimental period. The reactor operated continuously for 9 months and assessed self-inoculation and raw domestic sewage purification. The unit was started without inoculum and ran during the entire experimental period with a hydraulic retention time of 4 h. During the experiment, a sludge bed build-up was observed. At the end of the experimental period, the predominance of spherical granular particles up to 6 8
12

mm in diameter was evident. After a 4-month operation, it was observed that the inoculation/acclimatization steps had been concluded. Removal efficiencies of BOD5 = 78%, COD = 74% and TSS = 72% were obtained. A typical gas production factor of 80 l kg1 COD added was observed and the CH4 content of the biogas was 69%.

2.3 Technical review on the UASB process


KwanChow Lin et al. (1991) studied about a comprehensive review of the UASB wastewater treatment process. Factors affecting granulation of the anaerobic sludge, startup of the process and operation of UASB reactor are analyzed. Criteria about design and construction of the UASB reactor are described, and studies on mathematical modeling of fluid flow pattern, sludge distribution and biological conversion of substrate in the UASB reactor are reviewed. Finally, applications of the process to the treatment of various types of wastewater are summarized.

2.4 Microbial attachment and growth in Fixed-Film Reactors: Process startup considerations
A.P. Annachhatre and S.M.R. Bhamidimarri (1992) studied that Optimal steady-state performance of any biofilm reactor requires a fully developed and mature biofilm. During fixed-film reactor startup phase, biofilm is in process of development and accordingly, process performance is difficult to quantify. Environmental, cellular and surface factors greatly influence the process of biofilm formation during reactor startup. Improved knowledge of nutritional, toxicological and environmental requirements of wastewater degrading microorganisms has helped define optimal microbial growth conditions. In case of anaerobic fixed film reactors the startup is hindered by low microbial growth rates, strict environmental requirements and limited ability of methanogens to adhere and form fixed biofilms. These obstacles could be overcome by proper support media selection and formulation of appropriate inoculation procedures and startup strategies.

13

2.5

Small wastewater treatment plants A challenge to wastewater engineers

Markus Boller (1997) found that three conferences on Small Wastewater Treatment Plants organized by the IAWQ Specialist Group demonstrate worldwide interest and activities in this matter and the need to exchange experience concerning planning, design, construction, operation, maintenance and control of small treatment plants. In near future, the number of small treatment works will increase tremendously and will be accompanied by a strong demand for information on appropriate procedures and technologies. Pollution problems caused by small wastewater flows are usually restricted to small areas, however, in view of the high per capita costs, treatment requirements and alternatives have to be studied carefully. In comparison to larger plants, more pronounced and different boundary conditions such as load fluctuations, operation and maintenance problems, per capita costs, and a large variety of feasible treatment and disposal systems ask for experienced engineers with a broad and sound knowledge in rural water quality management. The technical alternatives reaching from mechanical and simple biological low rate systems such as ponds, sand filters and reed beds to complex high rate suspended and fixed biomass reactors have to be evaluated regarding plant size, operation safety, reliability, demand for skilled personnel, investment and operation costs. In this respect, water engineers are increasingly challenged, not only to deal with a broad range of present and future treatment technologies, but also to integrate economical and social aspects into their evaluations.

2.6 A review: The anaerobic treatment of sewage in UASB and EGSB Reactors
Lucas Seghezzo et al. (1998) conducted the study and observed that anaerobic treatment process is increasingly recognized as the core method of an advanced technology for environmental protection and resource preservation and it represents, combined with other proper methods, a sustainable and appropriate wastewater treatment system for developing countries.
14

Anaerobic treatment of sewage is increasingly attracting the attention of sanitary engineers and decision makers. It is being used successfully in tropical countries, and there are some encouraging results from subtropical and temperate regions.

In this review paper, the main characteristics of anaerobic sewage treatment are summarized, with special emphasis on the upflow anaerobic sludge blanket (UASB) reactor. The application of the UASB process to the direct treatment of sewage is reviewed, with examples from Europe, Asia and the Americas. The UASB reactor appears today as a robust technology and is by far the most widely used high-rate anaerobic process for sewage treatment.

2.7

The innovative Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor/ solids contact reaeration process for secondary treatment of municipal wastewater

Bjorn Rusten et al. (1998) carried out an study on the innovative moving bed biofilm reactor/solids con tact reaeration (MBBR/SCR) process has been chosen for a new waste water treatment plant serving a population of 200 000 at Moa Point, Wellington, New Zealand. Because the MBBR/SCR combination was new, a pilot-scale demonstration project was made part of the contract. Thorough pilot tests using a wide range of organic loads under both steady and transient-flow conditions demonstrated that the MBBR/SCR process produced the required effluent quality at loads higher than used in the original design. At 3 days mean cell residence time (MCRT) in the SCR stage, a final effluent with a 5-day biochemical oxygen demand (BOD5) of less than 10 mg/L was achieved at an organic load on the MBBR of 15 g BOD5/ m2-d (5.0 kg BOD5/m3-d). With the same MCRT, a final effluent of less than 15 mg BOD5/L was achieved at an organic load on the MBBR of 20 g BOD5/m2 d (6.7 kg BOD5/m3 d). Dynamic loading tests demon started that a good-quality effluent was produced with a diurnal peak hour load on the MBBR of more than 40 g BOD5/m2 d (13.3 kg BOD5/ m3-d). The MBBR/SCR process was more compact and significantly cheaper than a conventional trickling filter/solids contact or activated-sludge process at the Moa Point site. Water Environ. Res., 70, 1083 (activated-sludge process at the Moa Point site. Water Environ. Res., 70, 1083 (1998).

15

2.8 Biological Fixed Film Systems


Mark W. Fitch et al. (1999) carried out a study in which the work reviewed here was published during the catalogue/issue year 1999 and described research involving biofilms treating pollutants. This review explicitly excludes research in medical biofilms, dental biofilms, biofilms causing corrosion and biofilm formation in drinking water treatment and distribution systems. Anaerobic biofilm treatment system research is not reviewed here although a set of references is provided. However, the authors have included coverage of denitrification in traditional biofilm treatment systems. Similarly, biofilm systems for the treatment of air pollutants is reviewed in the Gaseous Emissions from Wastewater Facilities section of this issue.

2.9 The Moving Bed Bio film Reactor


H. Odegaard et al. (1999) studied a new biofilm reactor for wastewater treatment: The Moving Bed Bio Film Reactor (MBBR). The result from the investigations of different applications (Carbonaceous removal, nitrification removal and nitrogen removal) when used for municipal wastewater treatment, are discussed, Design value are given and it is demonstrated that use of this reactor results in very compact treatment plants.

2.10

Performance evaluation of a UASB activated sludge system treating municipal wastewater

M. von Sperling*, V.H. Freire and C.A. de Lemos Chernicharo (2001): Recent research has indicated the advantages of combining anaerobic and aerobic processes for the treatment of municipal wastewater, especially for warm-climate countries. Although this configuration is seen as an economical alternative, is has not been investigated in sufficient detail on a worldwide basis.

This work presents the results of the monitoring of a pilot-scale plant comprising of an UASB reactor followed by an activated sludge system, treating actual municipal wastewater from a large city in Brazil. The plant was intensively monitored and operated for 261 days, divided into five different phases, working with constant and variable inflows.

16

The plant showed good COD removal, with efficiencies ranging from 69% to 84% for the UASB reactor, from 43% to 56% for the activated sludge system only and from 85% to 93% for the overall system. The final effluent suspended solids concentration was very low, with averages ranging from 13 to 18 mg/l in the typical phases of the research.

Based on the very good overall performance of the system, it is believed that it is a better alternative for warm-climate countries than the conventional activated sludge system, especially considering the total low hydraulic detention time (4.0 h UASB; 2.8 h aerobic reactor; 1.1 h final clarifier), the savings in energy consumption, the absence of primary sludge and the possibility of thickening and digesting the aerobic excess sludge in the UASB reactor itself.

2.11

Removal of slowly biodegradable COD in combined Thermophilic UASB and MBBR System

M.Ji et al (2001) studied that Starch, cellulose and polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) are common substrates of the slowly biodegradable COD (SBCOD) in industrial wastewaters. Removal of the individual and mixed SBCOD substrates was investigated in a combined system of thermophilic upflow anaerobic sludge blanket (TUASB) reactor (55C) and aerobic moving bed biofilm reactor (MBBR). The removal mechanisms of the three SBCOD substrates were quite different. Starch-COD was almost equally utilized and removed in the two reactors. Cellulose-COD was completely (97-98%) removed from water in the TUASB reactor by microbial entrapment and sedimentation of the cellulose fibers. PVA alone was hardly biodegraded and removed by the combined reactors. However, PVA-COD could be removed to some extent in a binary solution of starch (77%) plus PVA (23%). The PVA macromolecules in the binary solution actually affected the microbial activity in the TUASB reactor resulting accumulation of volatile fatty acids, which shifted the overall COD removal from the TUASB to the MBBR reactor where SBCOD including PVA-COD was removed. Since the three SBCOD substrates were removed by different mechanisms, the combined reactors showed a better and more stable performance than individual reactors.
17

2.12

Anaerobic sewage treatment in a one-stage UASB reactor and a combined UASB-Digester system

In an another study made by Nidal Mahmoud et al (2004) the treatment of sewage at 15C was investigated in a one-stage upflow anaerobic sludge blanket (UASB) reactor and a UASB-Digester system. The latter consists of a UASB reactor complemented with a digester for mutual sewage treatment and sludge stabilisation. The UASB reactor was operated at a hydraulic retention time of 6 h and a controlled temperature of 15C, the average sewage temperature during wintertime of some Middle East countries. The digester was operated at 35C.

The UASB-Digester system provided significantly (significance level 5%) higher COD removal efficiencies than the one-stage UASB reactor. The achieved removal efficiencies in the UASBDigester system and the one-stage UASB reactor for total, suspended, colloidal and dissolved COD were 66%, 87%, 44% and 30%, and 44%, 73%, 3% and 5% for both systems, respectively. The stability values of the wasted sludge from the one-stage UASB reactor and the UASB-Digester system were, respectively, 0.47 and 0.36 g CH4-COD/g COD. Therefore, the anaerobic sewage treatment at low temperature in a UASB-Digester system is promising.

2.13

Developments in wastewater treatment methods

Amit Sonune and Rupali Ghate (2004) studied that Wastewaters are waterborne solids and liquids discharged into sewers that represent the wastes of community life. Wastewater includes dissolved and suspended organic solids, which are putrescible or biologically decomposable. Two general categories of wastewaters, not entirely separable, are recognized: domestic and industrial. Wastewater treatment is a process in which the solids in wastewater are partially removed and partially changed by decomposition from highly complex, putrescible, organic solids to mineral or relatively stable organic solids. Primary and secondary treatment removes the majority of BOD and suspended solids found in wastewaters. However, in an increasing number of cases this level of treatment has proved to be insufficient to protect the receiving waters or to provide reusable water for industrial and/or domestic recycling.
18

Thus, additional treatment steps have been added to wastewater treatment plants to provide for further organic and solids removals or to provide for removal of nutrients and/or toxic materials. There have been several new developments in the water treatment field in the last years. Alternatives have presented themselves for classical and conventional water treatment systems. Advanced wastewater treatments have become an area of global focus as individuals, communities, industries and nations strive for ways to keep essential resources available and suitable for use. Advanced wastewater treatment technology, coupled with wastewater reduction and water recycling initiatives, offer hope of slowing, and perhaps halting, the inevitable loss of usable water. Membrane technologies are well suited to the recycling and reuse of waste water. Membranes can selectively separate components over a wide range of particle sizes and molecular weights. Membrane technology has become a dignified separation technology over the past decennia. The main force of membrane technology is the fact that it works without the addition of chemicals, with relatively low energy use and easy and well-arranged process conduction. This paper covers all advanced methods of wastewater treatments and reuse.

2.14 Potential of a Combination of UASB and DHS Reactor as a Novel Sewage Treatment System for Developing Countries: Long-Term Evaluation
In a study made by Madan Tandukar et al. (2006) A novel municipal wastewater treatment system, consisting of a combination of an upflow anaerobic sludge blanket (UASB) and downflow hanging sponge (DHS) post treatment unit, was continuously evaluated for more than three years with raw sewage as an influent. The system was installed at a sewage treatment site and operated at 253C. This paper reports on the results of a long term monitoring of the system. The whole experimental period was divided into three distinct phases with different operating conditions. Organic pollutants were only partially removed in anaerobic UASB pretreatment unit. The remaining organics as well as nitrogenous compounds were almost completely removed by the DHS post treatment unit.
19

In all phases the system demonstrated removal efficiency consistently over 95% for unfiltered biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), 80% for unfiltered-chemical oxygen demand and 70% for suspended solids. The system produced an excellent effluent quality with only 4 9 mgL of residual unfiltered BOD. Dissolved oxygen in the final effluent was 57 mgL although no aeration was provided to DH S system. Moreover, excess sludge production from DHS was negligible thus eliminating secondary sludge that is troublesome to dispose off. The system also exhibited substantial stability against twofold hydraulic shock load and fourfold organic shock load. The results suggested that the proposed system may be a competitive solution for municipal sewage treatment under variable conditions.

2.15 Treatment of pesticide wastewater by Moving-Bed Biofilm Reactor combined with Fenton-coagulation pretreatment
Sheng et al.(2006), South Korea conducted the study In order to treat pesticide wastewater having high chemical oxygen demand (COD) value and poor biodegradability, Fenton-coagulation process was first used to reduce COD and improve biodegradability and then was followed by biological treatment. Optimal experimental conditions for the Fenton process were determined to be Fe2+ concentration of 40 mol/L and H2O 2 dose of 97 mol/L at initial pH 3. The interaction mechanism of organophosphorous pesticide and hydroxyl radicals was suggested to be the breakage of the P S double bond and formation of sulfate ions and various organic intermediates, followed by formation of phosphate and consequent oxidation of intermediates. For the subsequent biological treatment, 3.2 g/L Ca(OH)2 was added to adjust the pH and further coagulate the pollutants.

The COD value could be evidently decreased from 33,700 to 9300 mg/L and the ratio of biological oxygen demand (BOD5) to COD of the wastewater was enhanced to over 0.47 by Fenton oxidation and coagulation. The pre-treated wastewater was then subjected to biological
20

oxidation by using moving-bed biofilm reactor (MBBR) inside which tube chip type bio-carriers were fluidized upon air bubbling.

Higher than 85% of COD removal efficiency could be achieved when the bio-carrier volume fraction was kept more than 20% by feeding the pretreated wastewater containing 3000 mg/L of inlet COD at one day of hydraulic retention time (HRT), but a noticeable decrease in the COD removal efficiency when the carrier volume was decreased down to 10%, only 72% was observed. With the improvement of biodegradability by using Fenton pretreatment, also due to the high concentration of biomass and high biofilm activity using the fluidizing bio-carriers, high removal efficiency and stable operation could be achieved in the biological process even at a high COD loading of 37.5 gCOD/(m2 carrier day).

2.16 Combined Anaerobic/Aerobic secondary municipal wastewater treatment: Pilot-Plant demonstration of the UASB/Aerobic Solid Contact System
Enrique J. La Motta et al. (2007) done a study in which Anaerobic pretreatment followed by aerobic post treatment of municipal wastewater is being used more frequently. Recent investigations in this field using an anaerobic fluidized bed reactor/aerobic solids contact combination demonstrated the technical feasibility of this process. The investigation presented herein describes the use of a combined upflow anaerobic sludge bed (UASB)/aerobic solids contact system for the treatment of municipal wastewater and attempts to demonstrate the technical feasibility of using the UASB process as both a pretreatment unit and a waste activated sludge digestion system.

The results indicate that the UASB reactor has a total chemical oxygen demand removal efficiency of 34%, and a total suspended solids removal efficiency of about 36%. Of the solids removed by the unit, 33% were degraded by the action of microorganisms, and 4.6% accumulated in the reactor. This low solids accumulation rate allowed operating the UASB reactor for three months without sludge wasting.
21

The long solids retention time in this unit is comparable to the one normally used in conventional sludge digestion units, thus allowing the stabilization of the waste activated sludge returned to the UASB reactor. Particle flocculation was very poor in the UASB reactor, and therefore, it required post aeration periods of at least 100 min to proceed successfully in the aerobic unit. Polymer generation, which is necessary for efficient biological flocculation, was practically nonexistent in the anaerobic unit; therefore, it was necessary to maintain dissolved oxygen levels greater than 1.5 mgL in the aerobic solids contact chamber for polymer generation to proceed at optimum levels. Once these conditions were attained, the quality of the settled solids contact chamber effluent always met the 30 mg BOD/L, 30 mg SS/L secondary effluent guidelines.

2.17 Performance comparison of a pilot-scale UASB and DHS system and activated sludge process for the treatment of municipal wastewater
Madan Tandukar et al. (2007), Japan made an study which compares the performance of a pilotscale combination of UASB and DHS system to that of activated sludge process (ASP) for the treatment of municipal sewage. Both systems were operated in parallel with the same sewage as influent. The study was conducted for more than 300 days, which revealed that organic removal efficiency of UASB + DHS system was comparable to that of ASP. Unfiltered BOD removal by both systems was more than 90%. However, UASB + DHS system outperformed ASP for pathogen removal. In addition, volume of excess sludge production from UASB +DHS was 15 times smaller than that from ASP. Moreover, unlike ASP, there is no requirement of aeration for the operation of UASB + DHS system, which makes it an economical treatment system. Considering the above observations, it was concluded that UASB + DHS system can be a costeffective and viable option for the treatment of municipal sewage over ASP, especially for low-income countries.

22

2.18

Efficiency evaluation of sewage treatment plant with different technologies in Delhi (India)

Priyanka Jamwal and Atul k.Mittal (2008) carried out an study on Physical, chemical and microbiological efficiencies of Sewage Treatment Plants (STPs) located in Delhis watershed in context of different treatment technologies employed in these plants have been determined. There were in all seventeen STPs treating domestic wastewater which were studied over a period of 12 months. These STPs were based on Conventional Activated sludge process (ASP), Extended aeration (Ex. Aeration), physical, chemical and biological removal treatment (BIOFORE) and oxidation pond treatment process.

Results suggests that except Mehrauli STP which was based on Extended a eration process and Oxidation pond, effluents from all other STPs exceeded FC standard of 103 MPN/100 ml for unrestricted irrigation criteria set by National river conservation directorate (NRCD). Actual integrated efficiency (IEa) of each STP was evaluated and compared with the standard integrated efficiency (IEs) based upon physical, biological and microbiological removal efficiencies depending upon influent sewage characteristics. The best results were obtained for STPs

employing extended aeration, BIOFORE and oxidation pond treatment process thus can be safely used for Irrigation purposes.

2.18

Treatment of domestic wastewater in an Up-Flow Anaerobic Sludge Blanket reactor followed by Moving Bed Bio film Reactor

A.Tawfik et al. (2009), The Netherlands

made an study to evaluate the performance of a

laboratory-scale sewage treatment system composed of an up-flow anaerobic sludge blanket (UASB) reactor and a moving bed biofilm reactor(MBBR) at a temperature of (2235 C) . The entire treatment system was operated at different hydraulic retention times (HRTs) of 13.3, 10 and 5.0 h.

23

An overall reduction of 8086% for COD total; 5173% for COD colloidal and 2055% for COD soluble was found at a total HRT of 510 h, respectively. By prolonging the HRT to 13.3 h, the removal efficiencies of COD total, COD colloidal and COD soluble increased up to 92, 89 and 80%, respectively.

However, the removal efficiency of COD suspended in the combined system remained unaffected when increasing the total HRT from 5 to 10 h and from 10 to 13.3 h. This indicates that, the removal of COD suspended was independent on the imposed HRT. Ammonia-nitrogen removal in MBBR treating UASB reactor effluent was significantly influenced by organic loading rate (OLR). 62% of ammonia was eliminated at OLR of 4.6 g COD m-2 day-1.

The removal efficiency was decreased by a value of 34 and 43% at a higher OLRs of 7.4 and 17.8 g COD m-2 day-1, respectively. The mean overall residual counts of faecal coliform in the final effluent were 8.9 9 104 MPN per 100 ml at a HRT of 13.3 h, 4.9 9 105 MPN per 100 ml at a HRT of 10 h and 9.4 9 105 MPN per 100 ml at a HRT of 5.0 h, corresponding to overall log10 reduction of 2.3, 1.4 and 0.7, respectively.

The discharged sludge from UASBMBBR exerts an excellent settling property. Moreover, the mean value of the net sludge yield was only 6% in UASB reactor and 7% in the MBBR of the total influent COD at a total HRT of 13.3 h. Accordingly, the use of the combined UASBMBBR system for sewage treatment is recommended at a total HRT of 13.3 h.

2.20

Assessment of the efficiency of Sewerage Treatment Plants

In another study made by Ravi Kumar et al. (2010), Bangalore, Bangalore city hosts two Urban Wastewater Treatment Plants (UWTPs) towards the periphery of Vrishabhavathi valley, located in Nellakedaranahalli village of Nagasandra and Mailasandra Village, Karnataka, India. These plants are designed and constructed with an aim to manage wastewater so as to minimize and/or remove organic matter, solids, nutrients, disease-causing organisms and other pollutants, before it reenters a water body.

24

It was revealed from the performance study that efficiency of the two treatment plants was poor with respect to removal of total dissolved solids in contrast to the removal/reduction in other parameters like total suspended solids, BOD and COD.

In Mailasandra STP, TDS, TSS, BOD, and COD removal efficiency was 20.01, 94.51, 94.98 and 76.26 % and respectively, while in Nagasandra STP, TDS, TSS, BOD, and COD removal efficiency was 28.45, 99.0, 97.6 and 91.60 % respectively.

The order of reduction efficiency was TDS < COD < TSS < BOD and TDS < COD < BOD < TSS respectively in Mailasandra and Nagasandra STPs. Additionally, the problems associated with the operation and maintenance of wastewater treatment plants is discussed.

2.21 Biofilms in Water and Wastewater treatment


Rakmi Abd.Rahman et.al (2010) studied that Biofilm reactors are increasingly used to treat industrial effluents with difficult components, this type of process has been applied to wastewaters containing various types of pollutants, such as those containing chlorinated organics. These have not been effectively removed by conventional activated sludge types of processes due to their recalcitrance. Biofilm reactors have biomass active even at very low concentrations of the target organics, rendering the reactor more efficient for removing trace toxic compounds in wastewaters.

Biofilm processes, having high biomass concentrations, have also been found to be less sensitive to the presence of toxic and inhibitory materials, and more resistant to shock loadings than the dispersed growth systems. Such characteristics are essential where floor space is becoming expensive and yet there is great need to treat and polish effluents before reuse.

With increasing pollution of rivers by trace industrial and household chemicals and pharmaceuticals, and greater demands for water, the difference between effluent polishing and water treatment is diminishing. With increasing knowledge of health effects of trace pollutants, a more effective yet affordable water treatment system than the conventional system has to be investigated. The conventional water treatment system of coagulation, settling and filtration,
25

removes mainly suspended solids; trace and recalcitrant organics would pass through the system. Greater use of groundwater and stricter drinking water limits, such as the new EU Drinking Water Directive (EU DWD), has established the use of biofilm processes in water treatment, such as in northern Italy.

Results of on-going research on use of biofilm processes for water and wastewater treatment are reported here. These are uses of biofilm columns for river water treatment and rainwater polishing, and use of biofilm columns for removal of chloroorganics and heavy metals. In all these studies the biofilm columns have been found very effective for treatment of river waters for removal of organics and nutrients, and treatment of wastewaters, for removal of chloroorganics and heavy metals.

Metabolite analysis indicated biodegradation of PCP reductive dechlorination had occurred in the reactor, showing that biofilms offered both oxidative and reductive conditions. Besides these special characteristics, no chemicals were employed in both water and wastewater biofilm treatments. Thus no chemical sludge was generated, besides lowering treatment costs due to chemicals. Biofilm processes as used here have potential to be further developed into cheaper, environmentally friendlier processes for treating water and wastewaters containing organics and heavy metals.

2.22 Comparison of overall performance between "Moving-Bed" and "Conventional" Sequencing Batch Reactor
E. Hosseini Koupaie et al. (2011) carried out a studied in which the main objective of the work was to compare the overall performances of "moving-bed" and "conventional" sequencing batch reactor. For this purpose, different experimental parameters including COD and dye concentration, turbidity, MLSS concentration, MLVSS/MLSS ratio, sludge volume index (SVI) and OxidationReduction Potential (ORP) were calculated.

26

One conventional sequencing batch reactor and three moving-bed sequencing batch reactors (MBSBR) were operated in this study. Each MB-SBR was equipped with a type of moving biofilm carrier. The results of dye, COD and turbidity analysis showed that there were no significant differences between the moving-bed and conventional sequencing batch reactors in the matters of effluent quality. A higher fluctuation of MLSS concentration and also higher SVI were observed in moving-bed compared to that of the conventional sequencing batch reactor. Higher ORP values which mean higher oxidation potential were measured in the reactors equipped with the moving carriers in comparison with those measured in the conventional sequencing batch reactor.

2.23 Integrated application of Upflow Anaerobic Sludge Blanket Reactor for the treatment of wastewaters

Muhammad Asif Latif et al (2011) observed that, the UASB process among other treatment methods has been recognized as a core method of an advanced technology for environmental protection. This paper highlights the treatment of seven types of wastewaters i.e. palm oil mill effluent (POME), distillery wastewater, slaughterhouse wastewater, piggery wastewater, dairy wastewater, fishery wastewater and municipal wastewater (black and gray) by UASB process. The purpose of this study is to explore the pollution load of these wastewaters and their treatment potential use in upflow anaerobic sludge blanket process. The general characterization of wastewater, treatment in UASB reactor with operational parameters and reactor performance in terms of COD removal and biogas production are thoroughly discussed in the paper. The concrete data illustrates the reactor configuration, thus giving maximum awareness about upflow anaerobic sludge blanket reactor for further research. The future aspects for research needs are also outlined.

27

2.24 Sustainable options of post treatment of UASB effluent treating sewage: A review
Abid Ali Khan et al. (2011) studied that upflow anaerobic sludge blanket (UASB) process is reported to be a sustainable technology for domestic wastewaters treatment in developing countries and for small communities. However, the inability of UASB process to meet the desired disposal standards has given enough impetus for subsequent post treatment. In order to upgrade the UASB based sewage treatment plants (STPs) to achieve desired effluent quality for disposal or for reuse, various technological options are available and broadly differentiated as primary post-treatment for the removal of organic and inorganic compounds and suspended matter; secondary post-treatment for the removal of hardly degradable soluble matter, colloidal and nutrients; and polishing systems for removals of pathogens. Hence, this paper discusses the different systems for the treatment of UASB reactor effluent treating sewage. Additionally, a comparative review, an economic evaluation of some of the emerging options was conducted and based on the extensive review of different integrated combination, i.e. UASB-different aerobic systems, a treatment concept based on natural biological mineralization route recognized as an advanced technology to meet all practical aspects to make it a sustainable for environmental protection, resource preservation and recovering maximum resources.

2.25 Upgrading Activated Sludge Systems and reduction in excess sludge


Hossein Hazrati and Jalal Shayegan (2011) studied on activated sludge systems they found that Most of 200 Activated Sludge Plant in Iran are overloaded and as a result, their efficiency is low. In this work, a pilot plant is manufactured and put into operation in one of the wastewater treatment plants in the west of Tehran. Instead of conventional activated sludge, a membrane bioreactor and an upflow anaerobic sludge blanket reactor used as a pretreatment unit in this pilot. For the sake of data accuracy and precision, an enriched municipal wastewater was opted as an influent to the pilot. Based on the attained result, the optimum retention time in this system was 4 h, and the overall COD removal efficiency was 98%.
28

As a whole, the application of this retrofit would increase the plants capacity by a factor of 5 and reducing the excess sludge by a factor of 10. The sludge volume index in the anaerobic reactor was about 12 after granulation occurred.

2.26 Improvements in Biofilm Processes for Wastewater Treatment


Husham T. Ibrahim et al. (2012) made an effort in this review paper which intends to provide an overall vision of biofilm technology as an alternative method for treating waste waters. This technology has been gaining popularity through the years, mainly because many wastewater treatment plants, which are still used Activated Sludge Process (AS) are present some shortcomings when exposed to increased hydraulic and organic loads.

Fundamental research into biofilms is presented in three sections, Biofilm Types and Characterization, Advantages and Drawbacks and Design Parameters. The reactor types covered in this review are: un-submerged fixed film systems (trickling filters and rotating biological contactors) and submerged fixed film systems (biological aerated flooded filters, submerged aerated filters, biofilm up-flow sludge blanket, fluidized bed, expanded granular sludge blanket, biofilm airlift suspension, internal circulation, moving bed biofilm and membrane biofilm) reactors.

2.27 Performance evaluation of Moving Bed Bio-Film Reactor technology for treatment of domestic waste water in Industrial Area at MEPZ (Madras Exports Processing Zone), Tambaram, Chennai, India
Ravichandran.M and Joshua Amarnath.D (2012) carried out a study on MEPZ, an industrial unit installed at Tambaram, Chennai, developed by the Ministry of Commerce and Industries, Government of India is discharging domestic waste water generated by the workers and treated in the 1.0MLD capacity Sewage Treatment Plant with Moving Bed Bio-film Reactor.
29

In this study, the performance of MBBR technology in removal of Biological Oxygen Demand and suspended Solids have been evaluated by testing the raw sewage and treated effluent at various situations like normal weather condition, heavy organic shock loading, dilution with storm water, when artificial aeration is disturbed due to power failure.

The test results showed that the removal efficiency of BOD5 and SS from the domestic waste water in normal weather condition in more than 98%, the efficiency of MBBR has not been affected due to heavy Organic shock loading and the efficiency is about 90% in the disturbance of artificial aeration.

The efficiency has been brought to this level by improving the surface area per unit volume of the carrier element as designed by the M/s Anox Kaldnes, a Norway company. It is suggested that the Moving Bed Bio-film Reactor technology could be used an ideal and efficient option for the treatment of domestic waste water, when the available area is minimum.

2.28 The performance enhancements of Upflow Anaerobic Sludge Blanket (UASB) reactors for domestic sludge treatment A State of the art review

Siewhui Chong et al. (2012) made a study in which he found that Nowadays, carbon emission and therefore carbon footprint of water utilities is an important issue. In this respect, we should consider the opportunities to reduce carbon footprint for small and large wastewater treatment plants. The use of anaerobic rather than aerobic treatment processes would achieve this aim because no aeration is required and the generation of methane can be used within the plant. High-rate anaerobic digesters receive great interests due to their high loading capacity and low sludge production. Among them, the upflow anaerobic sludge blanket (UASB) reactors have been most widely used.

30

However, there are still unresolved issues inhibiting the widespread of this technology in developing countries or countries with climate temperature fluctuations (such as subtropical regions). A large number of studies have been carried out in order to enhance the performance of UASB reactors but there is a lack of updated documentation.

2.29 Wastewater Treatment in Baghdad City Using Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor (MBBR) technology
Mohammed A. Abdul-Majeed et al. (2012) conducted a study in which, a laboratory scale system of Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor (MBBR) was used to treat municipal wastewater from a domestic community in Baghdad City to get the water free from BOD for reuse in the irrigation or discharge to the river. The aim of the described experimentation was the comparison of a low cost MBBR and an activated sludge system (AS); the other aim from this research is to derive successful MBBR wastewater reuse projects in Iraq. Laboratory experiments were conducted in two parts, firstly at BOD5 load of about (150-200) mg/l, filling ratio of plastic elements in the MBBR reactor was 40%. Aerobic reactor consumed most of the biodegradable organic matter.

The BOD5 removal efficiencies were 78 and 90% for MBBR & AS respectively. Second part when BOD5 load about (900-1300) mg/l used (synthetic wastewater) filling ratio is 67%. The removal efficiencies of BOD reached 73 % for AS and about 88% for MBBR.

2.30 A review of the Upflow Anaerobic Sludge Blanket Reactor


Chidozie Charles Nnaji (2013) conducted a study in which the upflow anaerobic sludge blanket (UASB) reactor has found wide acceptance in the treatment of industrial wastewaters since its development in the Netherlands.

31

It has been applied to a wide spectrum of wastewaters on both domestic and industrial scales.This acceptance stems from its simplicity, economy and the possibility of energy recovery. Studies focusing on UASB reactors are numerous; and though conflicting results have been observed, researchers are unanimous when it comes to the efficiency of the reactor in the treatment of highto medium-strength wastewaters with easily hydrolysable substrate. It has also recorded a level of success in sewage treatment in tropical countries. As much, success has not been recorded in cold climates and in the treatment of wastewaters containing complex or toxic substance. The efforts of numerous researchers have given rise to many variants and modifications of the UASB reactor, which have widened the scope of applicability of this very important facility. This paper presents a concise but comprehensive review of the UASB reactor and studies focusing on it. Key operational issues such as granulation, methanogenesis, hydraulic retention time, efficiency, toxicity, modifications of UASB reactors and biogas recovery were considered using facts and data sieved from literature. This review shows that UASB reactors can be adapted for the treatment of almost any type of wastewater if modified accordingly.

32

CHAPTER 3 MATERIALS AND METHODOLOGY 3.1 Selection of Sites and Sampling Points
Samples for analysis were collected from the three STPs mentioned above namely: 1. Raipur Kalan STP 2. Raipur Khurd STP 3. Diggian Mohali STP The major area from which samples were collected i.e the sampling points were: 1. Inlet and Final Outlet of Raipur Kalan STP 2. Inlet and Final Outlet of Raipur Khurd STP 3. Inlet and Final Outlet of Diggian Mohali STP

3.2 Collection of Samples


Grab Samples were collected as per APHA- Standard Methods for Examination of Water and Wastewater. Samples were collected 3 times, one each, in month of FEBRUARY, MARCH and APRIL during the duration of study.

3.3 Parameters Analyzed 1. Physico-chemical parameters


The parameters analyzed in this study were pH, Temp (Temperature), TSS (Total Suspended Solids), TDS (Total Dissolved Solids), Oil and Grease, chlorides and Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD).

2. Biological parameters
The biological parameters analyzed in present study included Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD).
33

3. Nutrient Load
The Nutrients analysed in this study were Nitrate-Nitrogen (NO3 N), Ammonical Nitrogen (NH3 N) and Phosphate (PO4-)

Table 3.1: Parameters and Methods for their Analysis


PARAMETER pH Temperature Oil and Grease Total Suspended Solids Total Dissolved Solids Biochemical Oxygen demand Chemical Oxygen Demand Chlorides Nitrate Nitrogen Ammonical Nitrogen Phosphate TEST METHOD Electrometric Digital Thermometer Soxhlet Extraction Membrane Filtration Gravimetric Winklers Titration Closed Reflux Titrimetry Argentometric Titration Acid Treatment followed by Spectrophotometry Distillation Titrimetric Ascorbic Acid Spectrophotometry

34

Laboratories used for Parameters Analysis


1. STP Diggian Mohali Laboratory 2. Environ Tech Laboratories , Industrial Area, Phase -7, S.A.S. Nagar (Mohali Punjab) 3. 39 - Water Works Laboratory, Sector 39, Chandigarh

3.4 Methods for Parameters Analysis

pH
Method: Electrometric method was adopted for the determination. Procedure Standardize the pH meter by immersing the electrode in a buffer solution of known pH, normally 4 and 9. Read the pH and calibrate, till it indicates the correct value for pH of buffer solution. Rinse the electrode in distilled water and immerse them in sample. Read the pH value.

Fig 3.1: pH Apparatus


35

Temperature (Temp)
Method: Digital Thermometer was used for analysis of temperature. Procedure

Take 100 mL of sample in a beaker. Put Digital Thermometer in the beaker containing sample. The instrument will show the reading related to temperature in oC.

Fig 3.2: Digital Thermometer Oil and Grease


Method: Soxhlet Extraction Method Procedure
36

Prepare filter consisting of a Muslin cloth disc overlaid with filter paper. Wet the cloth and paper. Pass 100 mL of filter aid suspension through the prepared filter using vacuum and wash with 1 litre of distilled water. Filter the acidified sample. Apply vacuum until no more liquid sample passes through filter paper. Using forceps transfer the filter paper to a watch glass. Add material adhering to edges of muslin cloth disc. Wipe sides and bottom of collection vessel and Buchner funnel with filter paper soaked in solvent, taking care to remove all films caused by grease and to collect all the solids material.

Add pieces of filter paper on watch glass. Roll all filter papers containing sample and put into an extraction thimble. Add any piece of material remaining on watch glass. Wipe the watch glass with filter paper soaked in solvent and place it in the thimble. Dry the thimble at 1030C for 30 minutes in an oven. Fill the thimble with glass whool or small glass beads. Weigh the extraction flask and extract oil and grease in Soxhlet Apparatus, using hexane at a rate of 20 cycles per hour for 4 hours counting first cycle. Place the flask on a water bath at 700C for 15 minutes and draw air through it by vacuum for final 1 minute Cool, in desiccators for 30 minutes and weigh.

Calculation Oil and Grease, mg/L = M x 1000 Where,

V
M = Mass, in mg, of the residue V = Volume in ml of the sample taken for test

37

Fig 3.3: Soxhlet Apparatus

Total Suspended Solids (TSS)


Method: Membrane filtration Method Procedure Take 50 mL of sample in Gooch crucible. Place the Gooch crucible on the glass fiber apparatus. Switch on the electrical supply.
38

Liquid passes in the glass fiber. Solids remains on the Asbestos layer. Weigh the empty Gooch crucible before the experiment and after drying the crucible at about 1030c in a oven to 15 mins.

Calculation Total Suspended Solids = (Weight of Gooch Crucible + Residue) - (Weight of empty Gooch Crucible ) Volume of sample Taken 1000

Gooch Crucible

39

Fig 3.4: Glass Fibre apparatus for Total Suspended Solids (TSS)

Total Dissolved Solids (TDS)


Method: Gravimetrically after drying in an oven Procedure Filter paper is washed by inserting it in the filtration assembly and filtering 3 successive 20 mL portions of distilled water. Suction is continued to remove all traces of water. Washings are discarded. Evaporating dish is dried at 104 10C for 1 h, cooled and stored in desiccator. It is weighed immediately before use. Sample is stirred with a magnetic stirrer and while stirring a measured volume is pipette on to the filter using a wide bore pipette. Sample volume is chosen to yield between 10 and 200 mg dried residue. Then washed with three successive 10 mL volumes of distilled water. Suction is continued for about 3 min after filtration is complete.
40

Total filtrate is transferred with washings to a weighed evaporating dish and evaporated to dryness in an oven at 104 10C. If necessary successive portions are added to the same dish after evaporation in order to yield between 10 and 200 mg dried residue. To prevent splattering oven temperature may be lowered initially by 20C below boiling point and raised to 104 0C after evaporation for 1h. Then cooled in a desiccator and weighed.

Calculation

Where: A = Weight of dried residue + dish, mg B = Weight of dish, mg.

Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD)


METHOD: Winklers Titration Procedure Prepare dilution water by adding 1mL each of phosphate buffer, Magnesium sulphate solution, Calcium chloride and ferric chloride solution to 1 liter distilled water.

Determine the exact capacity of three BOD bottles. Find out the D.O of undiluted sample and designate as DOS.

Prepare the desired percent mixture by adding samples in dilution water. Fill up one bottle with the mixture and the other one with dilution water blank. Incubate at a fix temperature for 27C, 3 days.
41

Find out DO in both bottles after incubation and designate mixture as DOi, blank as DOb.

Calculation BOD3, 27 C (mg/L) = [(DOB - DOi) D.F (DOb- DOS)] Where, DOB = DO of blank solution (dilution water) DOb = DO of incubated blank solution DOi = DO of incubated diluted sample DOS = DO of undiluted sample (sample) D.F = dilution factor = Total vol. of sample + Blank mL of Sample

Fig 3.5: BOD Incubator


42

Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD)


METHOD: Closed Reflux Titrimetry Procedure Take 50 mL of sample or a smaller amount dilute to 50.0ml in a refluxing flask. Add 1g of HgSO4 and 5 mL of H2SO4 (in which 1gm of silver sulphate is present in every 75ml acid). Add slowly to dissolve HgSO4. Cool the mixture. Add 25.0 mL 0.25N K2Cr2O7 solution and again mix. Attach the condenser and start the cooling water. Add the remaining acid agent 70 mL through the open end of the condenser, mix the reflux mixture. Apply the heat and reflux the mixture for 2hr and cool. Dilute the mixture to about 300 mL and titrate excess of dichromate with standard ferrous ammonium sulphate using Ferroin indicator. The color changes from yellow to green blue and finally red. Record the mL of titrant used. Reflux in the same manner a blank consisting of distilled water, equal to the volume of sample and the reagents. Titrate as for sample. Record the ml of titrant used.

Calculation COD = (A-B)C x 8x 1000 mL Sample where, A = mL of Ferrous ammonium sulphate used for blank. B = mL of Ferrous ammonium sulphate used for sample. C = normality of ferrous ammonium sulphate solution.

43

Chloride (Cl -)
Method: Argentometric Titration Procedure Take 100 mL of sample in conical flask. Add 1mL of Potassium chromate indicator. Sample colour turns Yellow. Titrate with standard N/35.5 AgNO3 solution till the colour changes from yellow to brick red. Note the amount of titrant used.

Calculation Chlorides as Cl - = mL of AgNO3 used for sample x 1000 mL of sample

NITRATE NITROGEN (NO3 N)


Method: Acid Treatment followed by Spectrophotometry Procedure Treatment of sample: 1 mL HCl is added to 50 mL clear/filtered sample, mixed. Preparation of standard curve: Calibration standards are prepared in the range of 0-7 mg NO3--N/L, by diluting to 50 mL , 1 mL of HCl is added and mixed.

44

Spectrophotometric measurements: Absorbance or transmittance is read against re-distilled water set at zero absorbance or 100 % transmittance. A wavelength of 220 nm is used to obtain NO3- reading and a wavelength of 275nm to determine interference due to dissolved organic matter.

Calculation For sample and standards, 2 times the absorbance reading at 275nm is subtracted, from the reading at 220nm to obtain absorbance due to NO3-. A standard curve is prepared by plotting absorbance due to NO3- against NO3--N concentration of standards. Sample concentrations are obtained directly from standard curve, by using corrected sample absorbance.

Fig 3.6: Spectrophotometer

45

Fig 3.7: Spectrophotometer Showing Standard Curve

Ammonical- Nitrogen (NH3 N)


Method: Distillation Titrimetric Method Procedure Preparation of equipment: 500 mL water and 20 mL borate buffer are added,pH is adjusted to 9.5 with 6N NaOH solution, and added to a distillation flask. A few glass beads or boiling chips are added and this mixture is used to steam out distillation apparatus. 500 mL dechlorinated sample or a known portion diluted to 500 mL is used. The following table is used to decide on sample volume.

46

25 mL borate buffer is added and pH is adjusted to 9.5 with 6N NaOH using a pH meter. It is distilled at a rate of 6 to 10 mL/min with the tip of the delivery tube below the surface of 50 mL indicting boric acid in a 500 mL Erlenmeyer flask. At least 200 mL distillate is collected. The distillate-receiving flask is lowered in the last minute or two to clean condenser and suction of the distillate is avoided into the condenser when the heater is turned off.

Ammonia is titrated in distillate with 0.02 N H2SO4titrant until indicator turns pale lavender. A blank is carried through all steps and necessary correction is applied to the results.

Calculation

where: A = mL H2SO4 titrated for sample B = mL H2SO4 titrated for blank

47

Phosphate (PO4- )
Method: Ascorbic Acid Spectrophotometry Procedure Treatment of sample: 50 mL sample is taken into a 125 mL conical flask and 1 drop of phenolphthalein indicator is added. Any red colour is discharged by adding 5 N H2SO4. 8 mL combined reagent is added and mixed. After 10 minutes, but no more than 30 minutes, absorbance of each sample is measured at 880nm. Reagent blank is used as reference. Correction for turbid or coloured samples: A sample blank is prepared by adding all reagents except ascorbic acid and potassium antimonyl tartrate to the sample. Blank absorbance is subtracted from sample absorbance reading. Preparation of calibration curve: Calibration from a series of standards between 0.15-1.30 mg P/L range (for a 1 cm light path) is prepared. Distilled water blank is used with the combined reagent. Calculation A graph with absorbance versus phosphate concentration is plotted to give a straight line. At least one phosphate standard is tested with each set of samples.

48

Table 3.2: Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) General Standards for the Discharge of Environmental Pollutants according to The Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986 Schedule-VI Part A: Effluents
Inland Parameter surface water Colour and odour Public sewers Land for irrigation Marine/Coastal areas

(a) For process waste water Suspended solids mg/l, max. 100 600 200 (b) For cooling water effluent 10 per cent above total suspended matter of influent. (a) Floatable Particle size of suspended solids shall pass 850 micron IS Sieve solids, max. 3 mm (b) Settleable solids, max 856 microns

pH value

5.5 to 9.0

5.5 to 9.0

5.5 to 9.0

5.5 to 9.0

49

shall not exceed 5C Temperature above the receiving water temperature shall not exceed 5C above the receiving water temperature

Oil and grease, mg/l max,

10

20

10

20

Total residual chlorine, mg/l max Ammonical nitrogen as N; mg/l, max. Total kjeldahl nitrogen (as N);mg/l, max. mg/l, max. Free ammonia (as NH3), mg/l,max. Biochemical oxygen demand (3 days at 27C), mg/l, max.
50

1.0

1.0

50

50

50

100

100

5.0

5.0

30

350

100

100

Chemical oxygen demand, mg/l, max. 250 250

Arsenic (as As).

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.2

Mercury (As Hg), mg/l, max.

0.01

0.01

0.01

Lead (as Pb) mg/l, max

0.1

1.0

2.0

Cadmium (as Cd) mg/l, max

2.0

1.0

2.0

Hexavalent chromium (as Cr + 6), mg/l, max. Total chromium (as Cr) mg/l, max. 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.1 2.0 1.0

Copper (as Cu) mg/l, max.

3.0

3.0

3.0

51

Zinc (as Zn) mg/l, max.

5.0

15

15

Selenium (as Se)

0.05

0.05

0.05

Nickel (as Ni) mg/l, max.

3.0

3.0

5.0

Cyanide (as CN) mg/l, max.

0.2

2.0

0.2

0.2

Fluoride (as F) mg/l, max.

2.0

15

15

Dissolved phosphates (as P),mg/l, max. 5.0 -

Sulphide (as S) mg/l, max.

2.0

5.0

Phenolic compounds (as C6H50H)mg/l, max. 1.0 5.0 5.0

52

Radioactive materials: (a) Alpha emitters micro curie mg/l, max. (b)Beta emitters micro curie mg/l 90% survival of fish after 96 hours in 100% effluent 90% survival of fish after 96 hours in 100% effluent 90% survival of fish after 96 hours in 100% effluent 10 -6 10 -6 10 -7 10 -6 10 -7 10 -7 10 -8 10 -7

90% survival of Bio-assay test fish after 96 hours in 100% effluent

Manganese

2 mg/l

2 mg/l

2 mg/l

Iron (as Fe)

3mg/l

3mg/l

3mg/l

Vanadium (as V)

0.2mg/l

0.2mg/l

0.2mg/l

Nitrate Nitrogen

10 mg/l

20 mg/l

53

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS 4.1 RESULTS Concentration in mg/L, for all parameters except pH and Temp (C) Table 4.1: Characteristics of INFLUENT and EFFLUENT of all the 3 STPs in the month of FEBRUARY
Raipur Kalan STP Parameters (UASB Technology) Influent Ph Temp TSS TDS Oil and Grease BOD3, 27 C COD ClNO3 -N NH3 N PO47.9 18.4 159.0 283.0 3.7 154.0 367.0 192.0 1.7 28.7 14.9 Effluent 8.6 18.1 38.0 160.0 0.4 34.0 196.0 88.0 1.4 30.3 3.8 Raipur Khurd STP (ASP Technology) Influent 7.8 18.6 168.0 285.0 4.5 140.0 395.0 118.0 2.4 25.3 20.2 Effluent 8.4 18.0 63.0 169.0 0.3 37.0 78.0 98.8 1.5 28.1 3.9 Mohali STP (MBBR Technology) Influent 7.6 18.3 172.0 291.0 5.2 184.0 371.0 168.0 3.3 19.7 24.8 Effluent 8.1 17.9 30.0 106.0 0.2 17.0 56.0 106.0 1.2 24.5 1.4

Temperature of Ghaggar river at the time of results calculated in February was 19.2 C

54

Table 4.2: Characteristics of INFLUENT and EFFLUENT of all the 3 STPs in the month of MARCH
Raipur Kalan STP Parameters (UASB Technology) Influent pH Temp TSS TDS Oil and Grease BOD3, 27 C COD ClNO3 -N NH3 N PO47.8 24.7 126.0 292.0 2.4 166.0 349.0 181.0 2.8 29.7 19.4 Effluent 8.3 23.0 29.0 173.0 0.2 32.0 105.0 57.0 1.3 38.3 5.2 Raipur Khurd STP (ASP Technology) Influent 8.4 24.8 238.0 312.0 3.6 151.0 379.0 111.0 4.1 34.8 15.2 Effluent 8.9 22.0 155.0 122.0 0.7 47.0 99.0 79.0 1.4 29.5 7.8 Mohali STP (MBBR Technology) Influent 7.8 23.8 150.0 299.0 4.7 187.0 357.0 174.0 4.9 21.6 15.9 Effluent 8.4 22.3 39.0 140.0 0.9 27.0 63.0 199.0 1.4 17.6 1.96

Temperature of Ghaggar river at the time of results calculated in March was 27.4 C

55

Table 4.3: Characteristics of INFLUENT and EFFLUENT of all the 3 STPs in the month of APRIL
Raipur Kalan STP Parameters (UASB Technology) Influent pH Temp TSS TDS Oil and grease BOD3, 27 C COD ClNO3 -N NH3 N PO46.8 26.3 134.0 237.0 2.9 179.0 299.0 169.0 4.7 19.5 11.6 Effluent 7.7 27.4 30.0 157.0 0.6 35.0 144.0 53.0 3.2 28.8 5.5 Raipur Khurd STP (ASP Technology) Influent 6.9 26.9 141.0 229.0 3.8 149.0 358.0 147.0 5.9 23.2 17.3 Effluent 7.7 27.7 51.0 147.0 0.9 31.0 72.0 33.0 2.3 37.8 4.1 Mohali STP (MBBR Technology) Influent Effluent 7.2 26.1 149.0 254.0 3.3 189.0 312.0 158.0 5.2 17.5 13.5 7.6 26.5 32.0 131.0 0.4 26.0 84.0 113.0 2.4 23.6 2.9

Temperature of Ghaggar river at the time of results calculated in APRIL was 32.6 C

56

Table 4.4: Average characteristics of INFLUENT and EFFLUENT of all the 3 STPs
Raipur Kalan STP Parameters (UASB Technology) Influent pH Temp TSS TDS Oil and grease BOD3, 27 C COD ClNO3 -N NH3 N PO47.5 23.1 139.6 270.6 3.0 166.3 338.3 180.6 3.1 25.9 15.3 Effluent 8.2 22.8 32.3 163.3 0.4 33.6 148.3 66.0 1.9 32.4 4.8 Raipur Khurd STP (ASP Technology) Influent 7.7 23.4 182.3 275.3 3.9 146.6 377.3 125.3 4.1 27.7 17.5 Effluent 8.3 22.5 89.6 146.0 0.6 38.3 83.0 70.0 1.7 31.8 5.0 Mohali STP (MBBR Technology) Influent 7.5 22.7 157.0 281.3 4.4 186.6 346.6 166.6 4.4 19.6 18.1 Effluent 8.0 22.1 33.6 125.6 0.5 23.3 67.6 139.3 1.6 21.9 2.1

Average Temperature of Ghaggar river at the time of results calculated in FEB, March and APRIL was 26.4 C

57

Graphical Representation of Average characteristics of INFLUENT and EFFLUENT of all the 3 STPs X- Axis: Influent and Effluent Y- Axis: Concentration in mg/L, for all parameters except pH and Temp (C)
8.4 8.2 8 7.8 7.6 7.4 7.2 7 Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent Effluent pH

Raipur Kalan STP (UASB Technology)

Raipur Khurd STP (ASP Technology)

Mohali STP (MBBR Technology)

Fig 4.1: Graphical Representation of pH


23.5 23 22.5 22 21.5 21 Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Temp

Raipur Kalan STP (UASB Technology)

Raipur Khurd STP (ASP Technology)

Mohali STP (MBBR Technology)

Fig 4.2: Graphical Representation of Temp


58

200 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent Effluent TSS

TSS Concentration in mg/L

Raipur Kalan STP (UASB Technology)

Raipur Khurd STP (ASP Technology)

Mohali STP (MBBR Technology)

Fig 4.3: Graphical Representation of TSS

300

TDS Concentration in mg/L

250 200 150 100 50 0 Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Raipur Kalan STP Raipur Khurd STP Mohali STP (MBBR (UASB Technology) (ASP Technology) Technology) TDS

Fig 4.4: Graphical Representation of TDS

59

Oil and Grease Concentration in mg/L

5 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Raipur Kalan STP Raipur Khurd STP (UASB (ASP Technology) Technology) Mohali STP (MBBR Technology) Oil and grease

Fig 4.5: Graphical Representation of Oil and Grease

BOD Concentration in mg/L

200 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Raipur Kalan STP Raipur Khurd STP Mohali STP (MBBR (UASB Technology) (ASP Technology) Technology)

BOD3, 27 C

Fig 4.6: Graphical Representation of BOD

60

400 350

COD Concentration in mg/L

300 250 200 150 100 50 0 Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent Effluent COD

Raipur Kalan STP (UASB Technology)

Raipur Khurd STP (ASP Technology)

Mohali STP (MBBR Technology)

Fig 4.7: Graphical Representation of COD


200 180 160

CI- Concentration in mg/L

140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Raipur Kalan STP Raipur Khurd (UASB STP (ASP Technology) Technology) Mohali STP (MBBR Technology) Cl-

Fig 4.8: Graphical Representation of Cl61

NO3 N Concentration in mg/L

4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent Effluent NO3 -N

Raipur Kalan STP (UASB Technology)

Raipur Khurd STP (ASP Technology)

Mohali STP (MBBR Technology)

Fig 4.9: Graphical Representation of NO3 N

35

NH3 N Concentration in mg/L

30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Effluent Effluent Effluent Influent Influent Influent NH3 N

Raipur Kalan Raipur Khurd STP (UASB STP (ASP Technology) Technology)

Mohali STP (MBBR Technology)

Fig 4.10: Graphical Representation of NH3 N

62

20 18

PO4 - Concentration in mg/L

16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent Effluent PO4-

Raipur Kalan STP Raipur Khurd STP (ASP Mohali STP (MBBR (UASB Technology) Technology) Technology)

Fig 4.11: Graphical Representation of PO4-

Table 4.5:

Comparison of all the three STPs Effluent with Central Pollution

Control Board (CPCB), General Standards for the Discharge of Environmental Pollutants according to The Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986 Schedule-VI Part A: Effluents
Raipur Khurd STP (ASP) Technology Average Effluent Comparison Result With CPCB

Raipur Kalan STP Parameter (UASB)

Mohali STP (MBBR) Technology Average Effluent

Technology Average Effluent

Effluent Discharge Standards Inland Water Lower than Permissible Limit into Surface

pH

8.2

8.3

8.0

63

Temp

22.8

22.5

22.1

Lower than Permissible Limit Lower than Permissible Limit Lower than Permissible Limit Lower than Permissible Limit Higher than Permissible Limit for

TSS

32.3

89.6

33.6

TDS Oil and Grease

163.3

146.0

125.6

0.4

0.6

0.5

BOD3, 27 C

33.6

38.3

23.3

Raipur Kalan STP and Raipur Khurd STP

COD

148.3

83.0

67.6

Lower than Permissible Limit Lower than Permissible Limit Lower than Permissible Limit Lower than Permissible Limit Lower than Permissible Limit for

Cl-

66.0

70.0

139.3

NO3 -N

1.9

1.7

1.6

NH3 N

32.3

31.8

21.9

PO4-

Raipur Kalan STP 4.8 5.0 2.1 and Mohali STP but Exactly upto Permissible Limit for Raipur Khurd STP

64

45

BOD Concentration in mg/L

40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 (UASB) Technology Raipur Kalan STP (ASP) Technology Raipur Khurd STP (MBBR) Technology Mohali STP BOD
Standard Value

Fig 4.12: Graphical Representation of Parameter BOD Exceeding CPCB Standard

For

evaluating overall

Performance/Efficiency

of an STP four major

parameters are considered which are TSS, TDS, COD and BOD Removal / Reduction Efficiency is Calculated as:

Er =

Initial Amount Reduced Amount Initial Amount

X 100

65

Table 4.6: Overall Performance or Removal/Reduction Efficiency of all the 3 STPs

Removal/Reduction Efficiency

TSS

TDS

COD

BOD3, 27 C

Raipur Kalan STP (UASB) Technology

76 %

39 %

56 %

79 %

Raipur Khurd STP (ASP) Technology

51%

46 %

78%

73 %

Mohali STP (MBBR) Technology

78%

55 %

75 %

88 %

66

90%

80%

TSS Removal/Reduction Percentage

70%

60%

50%

40%

TSS

30%

20%

10%

0% Raipur Kalan STP (UASB) Technology Raipur Khurd STP (ASP) Technology Mohali STP (MBBR) Technology

Fig 4.13: Graphical Representation of TSS for Overall Performance or Removal/Reduction Efficiency of all the 3 STPs

67

60%

50%

TDS Removal/Reduction Percentage

40%

30% TDS

20%

10%

0% Raipur Kalan STP (UASB) Technology Raipur Khurd STP (ASP) Technology Mohali STP (MBBR) Technology

Fig 4.14: Graphical Representation of TDS for Overall Performance or Removal/Reduction Efficiency of all the 3 STPs

68

90%

80%

COD Removal/Reduction Percentage

70%

60%

50%

40%

COD

30%

20%

10%

0% Raipur Kalan STP (UASB) Technology Raipur Khurd STP (ASP) Technology Mohali STP (MBBR) Technology

Fig 4.15: Graphical Representation of COD for Overall Performance or Removal/Reduction Efficiency of all the 3 STPs
69

100%

90%

BOD Removal/Reduction Percentage

80%

70%

60%

50% BOD3, 27 C 40%

30%

20%

10%

0% Raipur Kalan STP (UASB) Technology Raipur Khurd STP (ASP) Technology Mohali STP (MBBR) Technology

Fig 4.16: Graphical Representation of BOD3, 27 C for Overall Performance or Removal/Reduction Efficiency of all the 3 STPs

70

100% 90% 80%

Removal/Reduction Percentage

70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% TSS TDS COD BOD Raipur Kalan STP (UASB) Technology

Raipur Khurd STP (ASP) Technology

Mohali STP (MBBR) Technology

Fig 4.17: Graphical Representation of Overall Performance or Removal/Reduction Efficiency of all the 3 STPs

71

Since out of 30 MGD of STP, Mohali 10 MGD treated waste water is reused for Irrigation purpose in various gardens and lawns of Sector: 19, 20, 21, 29, 30, 33, 34, 36, 40, 42, 43, 44, 46, 47, 48, 51 and 52 of Chandigarh city therefore Average Effluent of this STP is compared with the CPCB Effluent Discharge Standards into Land for Irrigation.

Table 4.7: Comparison of Mohali STP, (MBBR) Technology, Average Effluent with the CPCB Effluent Discharge Standards into Land for Irrigation

Mohali STP Parameter (MBBR) Technology Average Effluent pH Temp TSS TDS Oil and Grease BOD3, 27 C COD ClNO3 -N NH3 N PO48.0 22.1 33.6 125.6 0.5 23.3 67.6 139.3 1.6 21.9 2.1

Comparison Result With CPCB Effluent Discharge Standards into Land for Irrigation Lower than Permissible Limit _ Lower than Permissible Limit _ Lower than Permissible Limit Lower than Permissible Limit _ _ _ _ _

72

4.2 DISCUSSIONS

pH
The pH value of sewage indicates the negative log of hydrogen ion concentration present in sewage. It is thus, an indicator of the alkalinity or acidity of sewage. If the pH value is less than 7, the sewage is acidic, and if the pH value is more than 7, the sewage is alkaline. The

determination of pH value is important because of the fact that efficiency of certain treatment methods depends upon the availability of a suitable pH value. The PH directly affects the performance of a secondary treatment process because the existence of most biological life is dependent upon the narrow and critical range of pH. Thus, pH is also an indicator of biological life since most of them thrive in a quite narrow and critical pH range. In addition to all above, Chemical processes used to coagulate wastewater, dewater sludge or oxidize certain substances, such as cyanide ion requires that the pH be controlled within a narrow range. Thus, any variation beyond acceptable range could be fatal to a particular organism. During the course of the study it was recorded that pH varies from acidic to alkaline i.e 6.8-7.9, 6.9-8.4 and alkaline i.e 7.2-7.8 for Influent of STP Raipur Kalan, Raipur Khurd and Mohali

respectively. Maximum pH value was recorded in the month of February, March and March for Influent of STP Raipur Kalan, Raipur Khurd and Mohali respectively. Average pH value of the Influent was recorded as 7.5, 7.7 and 7.5 for STP Raipur Kalan, Raipur Khurd and Mohali respectively indicating that the Influent was alkaline in nature for all the three STPs. Also during the course of the study it was recorded that pH varies from 7.7-8.6, 7.7-8.9 and 7.6-8.4 for Effluent of STP Raipur Kalan, Raipur Khurd and Mohali respectively which indicates that for all the above mentioned STPs the Effluent during the duration of study was alkaline in nature. Maximum pH value was recorded in the month of February, March and March for effluent of STP Raipur Kalan, Raipur Khurd and Mohali respectively. Average pH value of the Effluent was recorded as 8.2, 8.3 and 8.0 for STP Raipur Kalan, Raipur Khurd and Mohali respectively which clearly shows that the Effluent from above three STPs were alkaline in nature. Also Average pH

73

value of the Effluent for all the three STPs were under Permissible Limit according to CPCB Effluent Discharge Standards into Inland Surface water.

Since out of 30 MGD of STP, Mohali 10 MGD treated waste water is reused for Irrigation purpose in various gardens and lawns of Sector: 19, 20, 21, 29, 30, 33, 34, 36, 40, 42, 43, 44, 46, 47, 48, 51 and 52 of Chandigarh city, Average Effluent value of pH recorded for this STP was also under permissible limit according to CPCB Effluent Discharge Standards into Land for Irrigation.

Temperature (Temp)
The determination of temperature is also important because temperature has an effect on the

biological activity of bacteria present in sewage, and also it affects the solubility of gases in sewage. In addition, temperature also affects the viscosity of sewage, which in turn affects the sedimentation process in its treatment. In the present study temperature varies from 18.4-26.3oC, 18.6-29.9oC and 18.3-26.1oC for Influent of STP Raipur Kalan, Raipur Khurd and Mohali respectively. Maximum temperature value of influent was recorded in the month of April for all the three STPs. Average temperature was recorded as 23.1oC, 23.4oC and 22.7oC for Influent of STP Raipur Kalan, Raipur Khurd and Mohali respectively. Not much variation was found in temperature of Influent for all the three STPs. Also it was recorded that temperature varies from 18.1-27.4oC, 18.0-27.7oC and 17.7-26.5oC for Effluent of STP Raipur Kalan, Raipur Khurd and Mohali respectively. Maximum temperature value of Effluent was recorded in the month of April for all the three STPs. Average temperature was recorded as 22.8oC, 22.5oC and 22.1oC for Effluent of STP Raipur Kalan, Raipur Khurd and Mohali respectively. Not much variation was found in temperature of Effluent for all the three STPs. Also Average temperature value of the Effluent for all the three STPs were under Permissible Limit according to CPCB Effluent Discharge Standards into Inland Surface water
74

Total Suspended Solids (TSS) and Total dissolved Solids (TDS)


Sewage normally contains very small amount of solids in relation to the huge quantity of water (99.9%). Solids in the sewage comprise of both: Organic as well as Inorganic solids. As a general rule, the presence of inorganic solids in sewage is not harmful. They require only mechanical appliances for their removal in the treatment plant. On the other hand suspended and dissolved organic solids are responsible for creating nuisance, if disposed of untreated.

Total Solids (TS) have great implications in the control of biological and physical waste water treatment processes. Total solids (TS), is a sum of two terms namely Total Suspended Solids (TSS) and Total Dissolved Solids (TDS). TDS and TSS are common indicators of polluted water and wastewater therefore these to parameters are must to determine. Also in overall performance of an STP they are considered as important parameters. More over TDS of the wastewater is of concern as it affects the reuse of wastewater for agricultural purposes, by decreasing the hydraulic conductivity of irrigated land.

TSS
In the present study it was recorded that TSS varies from 126-159 mg/L, 141-238 mg/L and 149172 mg/L for the Influent of STP Raipur Kalan, Raipur Khurd and Mohali respectively. Maximum TSS value was recorded in the month of February, March and February for Influent of STP Raipur Kalan, Raipur Khurd and Mohali respectively. Average TSS value of the Influent was recorded as 139.6 mg/L, 182.3 mg/L and 157.0 mg/L for STP Raipur Kalan, Raipur Khurd and Mohali respectively. Average TSS value for the Influent of all the three STPs indicated much variation among the three STPs in terms of TSS value for the Influent , which is attributed to large difference in the organic and inorganic loading of solids with liquid content in all the three STPs.

In the present study it was recorded that TSS varies from 29-38 mg/L, 51-155 mg/L and 30-39 mg/L for the Effluent of STP Raipur Kalan, Raipur Khurd and Mohali respectively. Maximum TSS value was recorded in the month of February, March and March for Effluent of STP Raipur Kalan, Raipur Khurd and Mohali respectively.

75

Average TSS value of the Effluent was recorded as 32.3 mg/L, 89.6 mg/L and 157.0 mg/L for STP Raipur Kalan, Raipur Khurd and Mohali respectively. Average TSS value for the Effluent of all the three STPs indicated much variation among the three STPs in terms of TSS value for the Effluent, which is again attributed to large difference in the organic and inorganic loading of solids with liquid content in all the three STPs. Also Average TSS value of the Effluent for all the three STPs were under Permissible according to CPCB Effluent Discharge Standards into Inland Surface water. Since out of 30 MGD of STP, Mohali 10 MGD treated waste water is reused for Irrigation purpose in various gardens and lawns of Sector: 19, 20, 21, 29, 30, 33, 34, 36, 40, 42, 43, 44, 46, 47, 48, 51 and 52 of Chandigarh city, Average Effluent value of TSS value recorded for this STP was also under permissible limit according to CPCB Effluent Discharge Standards into Land for Irrigation. Limit

TDS
In the present study it was recorded that TDS varies from 237-292 mg/L, 229-312 mg/L and 254299 mg/L for the Influent of STP Raipur Kalan, Raipur Khurd and Mohali respectively. Maximum TDS value of Influent was recorded in the month of March for all the three STPs. Average TDS value of the Influent was recorded as 270.6 mg/L, 275.3 mg/L and 281.3mg/L for STP Raipur Kalan, Raipur Khurd and Mohali respectively. Average TDS value for the Influent of all the three STPs indicated not much variation among the three STPs in terms of TDS value for the Influent, which is attributed to less difference in the organic and inorganic loading of solids with liquid content in all the three STPs.

In the present study it was recorded that TDS varies from 157-173 mg/L, 122-169 mg/L and 106140 mg/L for the Effluent of STP Raipur Kalan, Raipur Khurd and Mohali respectively. Maximum TDS value was recorded in the month of March, February and March for Effluent of STP Raipur Kalan, Raipur Khurd and Mohali respectively. Average TDS value of the Effluent was recorded as 163.3 mg/L, 146.0 mg/L and 125.6 mg/L for STP Raipur Kalan, Raipur Khurd and Mohali respectively. Average TDS value for the Effluent of all the three STPs indicated much variation among the three STPs in terms of TDS value for the Effluent, which is again
76

attributed to large difference in the organic and inorganic loading of solids with liquid content in all the three STPs. Also Average TDS value of the Effluent for all the three STPs were under Permissible Limit according to CPCB Effluent Discharge Standards into Inland Surface water.

Oil and grease


Oil and Grease are derived in sewage from the discharges of animals and vegetable matter, which mainly come from kitchens, hotels and restaurants and many other places. The determination of Oil and Grease in sewage is important because such matter forms scum on the top of the sedimentation tanks and clogs the voids of the filtering media. They thus interfere with the normal treatment methods, and hence need proper detection and removal.

In the present investigation it was recorded that Oil and Grease varies from 2.4-3.7 mg/L, 3.6-4.5 mg/L and 3.3-5.2 mg/L for the Influent of STP Raipur Kalan, Raipur Khurd and Mohali respectively. Also was recorded that Oil and Grease varies from 0.2-0.6 mg/L, 0.3-0.9 mg/L and 0.2-0.9 mg/L for the Effluent of STP Raipur Kalan, Raipur Khurd and Mohali respectively. Not much variation was observed in Influent and Effluent value of Oil and Grease for all the three STPs which shows that the discharge from the various sources of Oil and Grease contain less amount of oily and greasy material during the duration of study. Also Average Oil and Grease value of the Effluent for all the three STPs were under Permissible Limit according to CPCB Effluent Discharge Standards into Inland Surface water. Since out of 30 MGD of STP, Mohali 10 MGD treated waste water is reused for Irrigation purpose in various gardens and lawns of Sector: 19, 20, 21, 29, 30, 33, 34, 36, 40, 42, 43, 44, 46, 47, 48, 51 and 52 of Chandigarh city, Average Effluent value of Oil and Grease recorded for this STP was also under permissible limit according to CPCB Effluent Discharge Standards into Land for Irrigation.

77

Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD)


Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) is the measure of biodegradable organic matter present in a water sample and can be defined as the amount of oxygen required by the microbes in stabilizing the biologically degradable organic matter under aerobic condition. Determination of BOD is considered very important because BOD value can be used as a measure of waste strength in terms of oxygen required. The quantity of oxygen required may be taken as a measure of its content of decomposable organic matter. The rate of BOD exertion is governed by the characteristics of sewage, its decomposable organic matter, bacterial population and temperature. Moreover BOD is the most essential parameter which is considered to define the overall performance or efficiency of an STP. During the study it was recorded that BOD varies from 154-169 mg/L, 140-151 mg/L and 184-189 mg/L for the Influent of STP Raipur Kalan, Raipur Khurd and Mohali respectively. Maximum BOD value of Influent was recorded in the month of April, March and April for Influent of STP Raipur Kalan, Raipur Khurd and Mohali respectively. The highest value of BOD for Influent of the above three STPs noticed clearly indicates that this highest value is attributed to heavy organic and inorganic loading with less amount of water in the above mentioned months. Average BOD was recorded as 166.3 mg/L, 146.6 3 mg/L and 186.6 3 mg/L for the Influent of STP Raipur Kalan, Raipur Khurd and Mohali respectively, high average value of BOD for all the three STPs indicates the degree of pollution of Influent in each STP. Also DO was very less at inlet for all three STPs which is further stimulated by oxidation of sewage ammonia to nitrates, septic condition and heavy organic loadings, therefore high BOD value are obtained at inlet in all the three STPs . Out of all the three STPs mentioned above the average BOD value was maximum in Mohali STP BOD value for Effluent was in the range of 32-35 mg/L, 31-47 mg/L and 17-27 mg/L of STP Raipur Kalan, Raipur Khurd and Mohali respectively. Average BOD value for Effluent recorded was 33.6 mg/L, 38.3 mg/L and 23.3 mg/L of STP Raipur Kalan, Raipur Khurd and Mohali respectively. It was observed that average BOD value for Effluent of STP Raipur Kalan and Raipur Khurd was not under permissible limit according to CPCB Effluent Discharge Standards into Inland Surface
78

water. But average BOD value for Effluent of STP Mohali was under permissible limit according to CPCB Effluent Discharge Standards into Inland Surface water. Since out of 30 MGD of STP, Mohali 10 MGD treated waste water is reused for Irrigation purpose in various gardens and lawns of Sector: 19, 20, 21, 29, 30, 33, 34, 36, 40, 42, 43, 44, 46, 47, 48, 51 and 52 of Chandigarh city, Average Effluent value of BOD recorded for this STP was also under permissible limit according to CPCB Effluent Discharge Standards into Land for Irrigation.

Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD)


Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) is a measure of oxygen equivalent to the organic matter content of the water susceptible to oxidation by a strong chemical oxidant and thus is an index of organic pollution in the river. The test measures the amount of oxygen required for chemical oxidation of organic matter in the sample to carbon dioxide and water. COD is also an important parameter of water indicating the health scenario of freshwater bodies.

COD determination is considered important because it is widely used for measuring the pollution strength of wastewater. All organic compounds except few exceptions can be oxidized to carbon dioxide and water by the action of strong oxidizing agents regardless of biological assimilability of substances. In the present study COD value varies from 299-367 mg/L, 358-395 mg/L and 312-371 mg/L for the Influent of STP Raipur Kalan, Raipur Khurd and Mohali respectively. Maximum COD value of Influent was recorded in the month of February for Influent of all the three STPs. Highest value of COD in the month of February was due to the heavy organic loading with less amount of water. Average Influent value of COD recorded was 338.3 mg/L, 377.3 mg/L and 346.6 mg/L for the Influent of STP Raipur Kalan, Raipur Khurd and Mohali respectively. Not much variation was found in COD value for the Influent of STP Raipur Kalan, Raipur Khurd and Mohali.

79

COD value recorded in the range of 105-196 mg/L, 72-99 mg/L and 56-84 mg/L for the Effluent of STP Raipur Kalan, Raipur Khurd and Mohali respectively. Average COD value was recorded as 148.3 mg/L, 83 mg/L and 67.6 mg/L for the Effluent of STP Raipur Kalan, Raipur Khurd and Mohali respectively. It has been observed that average COD value for Effluent of STP Raipur Kalan, Raipur Khurd and Mohali was under permissible limit according to CPCB Effluent Discharge Standards into Inland Surface water.

Chloride (Cl-) Chlorides are generally found in municipal sewage, and are derived from human feces and urinary discharges etc. Determination of Cl- is important because Cl- is one of the major inorganic anions in water and wastewater. Chloride is not strictly a pollutant but high concentration may harm agriculture crops and corrode the metallic pipes. However, large amounts of chloride content may enter from industries like ice cream plants, meat salting, etc thus increasing the chloride contents of sewage. Hence, when the chloride content of a given sewage is found to be high, it indicates the presence of industrial wastes or infiltration of sea water, thereby indicating the strength of sewage. In the present study Cl- value varies from 169-192 mg/L, 11-147 mg/L and 158-174mg/L for the Influent of STP Raipur Kalan, Raipur Khurd and Mohali respectively. Average Influent value of Cl- recorded was 180.6 mg/L, 125.3 mg/L and 166.6 mg/L for the Influent of STP Raipur Kalan, Raipur Khurd and Mohali respectively. Not much variation was found in Cl- value for the Influent of STP Raipur Kalan, Raipur Khurd and Mohali which indicates that there is no presence of industrial waste or infiltration of sea water which generally attributes to the strength of sewage. Cl- value recorded in the range of 53-88 mg/L, 33-98 mg/L and 106-199 mg/L for the Effluent of STP Raipur Kalan, Raipur Khurd and Mohali respectively. Average Cl- value was recorded as 66.0 mg/L, 70.0 mg/L and 139.3 mg/L for the Effluent of STP Raipur Kalan, Raipur Khurd and Mohali respectively. Average Cl- value of Effluent for the three STPs indicates much variation among the three with respect to the chloride content.
80

It was observed that average Cl- value for Effluent of STP Raipur Kalan, Raipur Khurd and Mohali was under permissible limit according to CPCB Effluent Discharge Standards into Inland Surface water.

Nutrient Load
The presence of nitrogen in sewage indicates the presence of organic matter, and may occur in one or more of the following forms: Free ammonia, Ammonical nitrogen, Nitrites and Nitrates. Source of nitrogenous organic matter for sewage are mainly animal and human waste. Ammonical nitrogen (NH3 N) indicates quantity of nitrogen present in sewage before the decomposition of organic matter is started. Nitrates indicates the presence of fully oxidized organic matter in sewage. Therefore the determination of Ammonical nitrogen (NH3 N) and Nitrate nitrogen (NO3 N) are important in sewage. Ammonical nitrogen (NH3 N) NH3 N in the present study varies from 19.5-29.7 mg/L, 23.2-34.8 mg/L and 17.5-21.6 mg/L for the Influent of STP Raipur Kalan, Raipur Khurd and Mohali respectively. Average Influent value of NH3 N recorded was 25.9 mg/L, 27.7 mg/L and 19.6 mg/L for the Influent of STP Raipur Kalan, Raipur Khurd and Mohali respectively indicating little bit variation in NH3 N Influent for the above three STPs. Effluent value for NH3 N was recorded in the range of 28.8-38.3 mg/L, 28.1-3.8 mg/L and 17.624.5 mg/L for STP Raipur Kalan, Raipur Khurd and Mohali respectively. Average Effluent value for NH3 N recorded was 25.9 mg/L, 27.7 mg/L and 19.6 mg/L of STP Raipur Kalan, Raipur Khurd and Mohali respectively. Effluent value of increases than the influent value in all the months during the duration of study of STP Raipur Kalan, indicating that nitrogenous organic matter is decomposed properly and and NH3 is evolved as an end product. Moreover Average Effluent value for NH3 N of all the three STPs was under permissible limit according to CPCB Effluent Discharge Standards into Inland Surface water.

81

Nitrate nitrogen (NO3 N) Nitrate is made in the human body, the rate of production being influenced by factors such as exercise. Therefore presence of nitrates in the wastewater is one of the indicators of contact with human wastes. NO3 N value was recorded in the range of 1.7-4.7 mg/L, 2.4-5.9 mg/L and 3.3-5.2 mg/L for the Influent of STP Raipur Kalan, Raipur Khurd and Mohali respectively. Average Influent value of NO3 N recorded was 3.1 mg/L, 4.1 mg/L and 4.4 mg/L for the Influent of STP Raipur Kalan, Raipur Khurd and Mohali respectively indicating that NO3 N content in the inlet of all the three STPs were almost the same as same amount of nitrogenous organic matter entered in all the above three STPs. In the present study it was recorded that Effluent value for NO3 N varies from 1.3-3.2 mg/L, 1.42.3 mg/L and 1.2-2.4 mg/L for the Effluent of STP Raipur Kalan, Raipur Khurd and Mohali respectively. Average Effluent value for NO3 N recorded was 1.9 mg/L, 1.7 mg/L and 1.6 mg/L of STP Raipur Kalan, Raipur Khurd and Mohali respectively indicating that NO3 N content in the outlet of all the three STPs were almost the same. Moreover Average Effluent value for NO3 N of all the three STPs was under permissible limit according to CPCB Effluent Discharge Standards into Inland Surface water. Phosphate (PO4- ) Phosphorous occurs in wastewater as phosphates. The source of phosphates to sewage are mainly due to detergents, they are added during laundering or other cleaning, because these materials are major constituents of many commercial cleaning preparations. Organic phosphates are formed primarily by biological processes. They are contributed to sewage by body wastes and food residues, and may be formed from orthophosphates in the biological treatment processes or by receiving water biota. Phosphates also occur in bottom sediments and biological sludge, both as precipitated inorganic forms and incorporated into organic compounds. PO4- value varies from 11.6-14.9 mg/L, 15.2-20.2 mg/L and 13.5-24.8 mg/L for the Influent of STP Raipur Kalan, Raipur Khurd and Mohali respectively. Average Influent value of PO4recorded was 15.3 mg/L, 17.5 mg/L and 18.1 mg/L of STP Raipur Kalan, Raipur Khurd and
82

Mohali respectively indicating that phosphates content entering the inlet of all the above three STPs was near about the same. In the present study PO4- value varies from 3.8-5.5 mg/L, 3.9-7.8 mg/L and 1.4-2.9 mg/L for the Effluent of STP Raipur Kalan, Raipur Khurd and Mohali respectively. Average Effluent value of PO4- recorded was 15.3 mg/L, 17.5 mg/L and 18.1 mg/L of STP Raipur Kalan, Raipur Khurd and Mohali respectively. Average Effluent value of PO4- recorded was 4.8 mg/L, 5.0 mg/L and 2.1 mg/L of STP Raipur Kalan, Raipur Khurd and Mohali respectively. Moreover Average Effluent value for PO4- of STP Raipur Kalan and Mohali was under permissible limit according to CPCB Effluent Discharge Standards into Inland Surface water, but Average Effluent value for PO4- of STP Raipur Khurd was exactly upto permissible limit according to CPCB Effluent Discharge Standards into Inland Surface water. Determination of all the above the three nutrients were important also from the point of view that there increased concentration in effluent may cause eutrophication of river Ghaghar, in which the effluent of all the above three STPs is disposed of. Hence proper concentration of all the above three nutrients should be maintained before discharging the sewage effluent into the water body.

83

CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1

CONCLUSIONS

From the study conducted for the comparison of 3 STPs in the vicinity of Chandigarh city following conclusions are made:

Physico-Chemical and Biological Parameters evaluated for STP Mohali was under permissible limit according to CPCB Effluent Discharge Standards into Inland Surface Water during the course of study.

Since out of 30 MGD of STP, Mohali 10 MGD treated waste water is reused for Irrigation purpose in various gardens and lawns of Sector: 19, 20, 21, 29, 30, 33, 34, 36, 40, 42, 43, 44, 46, 47, 48, 51 and 52 of Chandigarh city therefore after evaluating various PhysicoChemical and Biological Parameters for this STP it was revealed that all the parameters evaluated were under permissible limit according to CPCB Effluent Discharge Standards into Land for Irrigation during the course of study. Hence Effluent from this STP is safer for agricultural use.

BOD value of the Effluent of STP Raipur Kalan and Raipur Khurd was not under permissible limit during the course of study and Average Phosphate value of Raipur Khurd was exactly upto permissible limit during the duration of study according to Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) General Standards for the Discharge of Environmental Pollutants Part A: Effluents, into Inland Surface Water according to The Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986 Schedule-VI. Also it was revealed from the performance study that efficiency of the three STPs mentioned above was poor with respect to removal of TDS (Total Dissolved Solids) in contrast to the removal /reduction efficiency in other parameters like TSS (Total Suspended Solids), BOD (Biochemical Oxygen Demand) and COD (Chemical Oxygen Demand).

84

The order of removal/reduction efficiency was 1.TDS(39%) 2.COD(56%) 3.TSS(76%) 4.BOD(79%), 1.TDS(46%) 2.TSS(51%) 3.BOD(73%) 4.COD(78%) and 1.TDS(55%) 2.COD(75%) 3.TSS(78%) 4.BOD(88%) respectively in Raipur Kalan STP, Raipur Khurd STP and Diggian Mohali STP.

In comparison with each other, out of the three STPs, Diggian STP Located at Mohali showed better results for the effluent, its removal /reduction efficiency for BOD is 88% and is highest among Raipur Kalan STP and Raipur Khurd STP which is 79% and 73% respectively. The greater removal /reduction efficiency for STP Mohali is attributed to the chemical treatment employed at this STP in the form of Tertiary Treatment of sewage.

From the evaluation it is further concluded that Mohali STP based upon MBBR technology have more stable results than Raipur Kalan STP, based upon UASB technology and Raipur Khurd STP, based upon ASP technology.

The order of overall performance for the technologies studied in different STPs are: 1.MBBR 2.UASB 3.ASP which proves that MBBR technology is ahead to UASB and ASP technology in the treatment of sewage

5.2

RECOMMENDATIONS
MBBR technology is recommended over ASP and UASB technology because of the following reasons (Advantages of MBBR technology over ASP and UASB technology):

It has established itself as a well proven, robust and compact reactor for the wastewater treatment. The efficiency of the reactor has been demonstrated in many process combination, both for BOD removal and nutrient removal. It can be used for small as well as large plants. The primary advantage of the process as compared to ASP technology is its compactness and no need for sludge recirculation. The advantages over other biofilm processes, is its flexibility, one can use almost any reactor shape and one can choose different operating loads in a reactor volume, simply

85

by choice of carrier filling. This technology can also be used for industrial waste water, particularly in the food industry and paper and pulp industry. UASB technology is recommended over ASP technology because of the following reasons:

It is simple and offer reasonable performance at presumably low cost of operation and maintenance. No electrical energy and mechanical equipments are required in UASB. It does not require any external aeration and thus the cost associated with energy and devices required for aeration and their maintenance are cut to zero. Excess sludge production from this system is negligible compared to ASP, again significantly reducing the cost for sludge handling as treatment as treatment and disposal of sewage sludge is technically cumbersome and economically a heavy burden.

The UASB technology can be cost effective and viable option for the treatment of municipal sewage over ASP, especially for low-income countries. Final Recommendation for treatment of sewage: 1. MBBR Technology 2. UASB Technology 3. ASP Technology

5.3

Future Scope of Work

Future Scope for UASB Technology:


The system helps to lower only two parameters of wastewater which are BOD and Suspended Solids (SS). Eventually, the system does not help in the removal of toxic pollutants, like heavy metals, which may present in some of the wastewater. The UASB system will therefore have to be supported by subsidiary disposal systems to remove the toxic pollutants, if present in the wastewater.
86

Like all other anaerobic high rate systems, UASB reactors also require larger quantity of organic matter as compared to the aerobic reactors, because the growth of aerobic bacteria per unit of organic matter is about 10-20 times the growth of anaerobes. In order to support microbial growth and metabolism in UASB systems, therefore, 20 to 30 times more of organic matter has to be metabolized, as compared to that in Aerobic systems. For the success of UASB, it therefore becomes necessary to ensure the presence of at least 10% of suspended solids in the wastewater.

Future Scope for ASP Technology:


The treatment systems must be properly operated and maintained, source of raw sewage need to be identified, and existing facilities should be upgraded accordingly. As for proper operation and maintenance, there is a need for trained and experienced workers to analyze the treatment performance at defined time interval and also the handle the machinery properly. STP should be utilized to full capacity so as to control the quality of final effluent. Bulking of sludge is a common trouble which has to be controlled, especially when industrial wastewater with high carbohydrate content or antiseptic properties are present. The quantity of returned sludge has to be adjusted every time, as and when there is a change in the quantity of sewage flow for the proper efficiency of the plant.

Future Scope for MBBR Technology:


The most important recommendation for MBBR technology is that Design criteria should be well established for its proper functioning. Since energy production is not there in MBBR technology hence measures should be taken to enhance the production of energy in these technologies.

87

REFERENCES
APHA AWWA-WPCF,2005. RStandard Methods for Examination of Water and Wastewater, 21st edition. American Public Health Association, Washington, DC,USA.

Abid Ali khan,Rubia Zahid Gaur,V.K Tyagi,Anwar Khursheed, Benilew, Indu Mehrotra and A.A Kazmi, Sustainable option of post treatment UASB,Resources ,Conservation and

Recycling,Vol.55,Issue 12,Oct (2011),pp.1232-1251

A.P Annachhatre and S.M.R Bhamidimarri, Microbial attachment and growth in fixed films reactor: Process start up considerations, Biotechnology Advances, Vol.10, Issue 1, (1992) pp.69-91

Amit Sonune and Rupali Ghate, Developments in wastewater treatment methods, Journal of Desalination, Vol.167, 15 Aug (2004), pp 55-63

A. Tawfik F. El-Gohary H. Temmink. Treatment of domestic wastewater in an up-flow anaerobic sludge blanket reactor followed by moving bed biofilm reactor, Bioprocess Biosyst Eng (2010) 33:267276

Bjorn Rusten, Mike Mcoy, Robert Proctor, Jon G.Siljudalen., The innovative moving bed biofilm reactor/solids contact reaeration process for secondary treatment of municipal sewage,Water Environment Research, Vol.70, No 5 (Jul-Aug 1998) pp.1083-1086

Chidozie Charles Nnaji, A review of the Upflow Anaerobic Sludge Blanket reactor, Jouranl of Desalination and water Treatment (2013) pp.1-12

Colmenarejo, M. F., Rubio, A., Sanchez, E., Vicente, J., Gracia,M. G., & Bojra, R. (2006). Evaluaton of municipal wastewater treatment plants with different technologies at Las-Rozas, Madrid (Spain). Journal of Environmental Management, 81, 399404.

D. Pokhrel, T. Viraraghavan. Treatment of pulp and paper mill wastewatera review, Science
of the Total Environment 333 (2004) 37 58
88

Dilip M. Ghaitidak & Kunwar D. Yadav (2013). Characteristics and treatment of greywatera review, Environ Sci Pollut Res DOI 10.1007/s11356-013-1533-0

E.Hosseini Koupaie, M.R Alavi Moghaddam and H. Hashemi, Comparison of overall performance between Moving Bed and Conventional Sequencing Batch Reactor,Iranian Journal of Environmental Health Science& Engineering, (2011), pp.235-244

Enrique J. La Motta, Eudomar Silva, Adriana Bustillos,Harold pardon and Jackeline Luque, Combined Anaerobic/Aerobic Secondary Municipal waste water treatment:Pilot-Plant

Demonstration of the UASB/Aerobic Solids contact System, Journal of Environmental Engineering, Vol.133, Issue 4 (April 2007)

Hossein Hazrati and Jalal Shayegan, Upgrading Activated Sludge Systems and reduction in excess Sludge, Bioresource Technology, Vol.102, Issue 22, Nov (2011),pp.10327-10332

Husham T.Ibrahim, He Qiang, Wisams. AI-Rekabi and Yang Qiqi, Improvenments in Biofilm Processes for wastewater treatment,Pakistan Jurnal of Nutrition, (2012),pp.610-636

Hospido A, Moreira MA, FeijooG (2007): A Comparison of Municipal Wastewater TreatmentPlants for Big Centres of Population in Galicia (Spain). Int J LCA13 (1) 5764

I garashi, T., watanbe, Y, asano, T. and tambo, N. the moving bed biofilm reactor, Water Environmental Engineering and Reuse of Water, Hokkaido Press 1999,p. 250-305

Kadiya Caldern , Jaime Martn-Pascual , Jos Manuel Poyatos , Beln Rodelas, Alejandro Gonzlez-Martnez and Jess Gonzlez-Lpez. Comparative analysis of the bacterial diversity in a lab-scale moving bed biofilm reactor (MBBR) applied to treat urban wastewater under differentoperational conditions, Bioresource Technology 121 (2012) 119126

89

Kwan- Chowlin,Ping and Zhenxiang Yang, Technical Review on the UASB process, International Journal of Environmental Studies,Vol.39, Issue 3, (1991)

Lucas Seghezzo,Grietje.Zeeman, Jules B.Van Lier,H.V.M hamelers,gatzeLettings, A Review: The anaerobic treatment of sewage in UASB and EGSB reactors, Journal of Bioresource Technology,Vol.65, Issue 3, Sept (1998),pp.175-190

Madun Tandukar,Izarul Machar, Shigeki Vemura,Akiyoshi Ohashi and Hideki Harada, Potential of combination of UASB and DHS reactor as a Noval Sewage treatment system for developing countries: Long term Evaluation,Journal of Environmental Engineering,Vol.132, Issue 2,Feb (2006)

Madan Tandukara, A. Ohashib and H. Harada.Performance comparison of a pilot-scale UASB and DHS system and activated sludge process for the treatment of municipal wastewater, WAT ER RE S E ARCH 41 (2007) 2697 2705

Mark W.Fitch, Adrid Lam,Robeet Segar. Biological Fixed Film Systems; Water Environment Research, vol.72, No.5 Markus Boller, Small waste water treatment plants: A Challenge to waste water engineers, Journal of Water Science and Technology,Vol.35, Issue 6, (1997), pp.1-2 Metcalf and Eddy Inc., (2003), Wastewater Engineering - Treatment, Disposal and Reuse, 4th Edition, Tata McGraw Hill Publishinh Co. Ltd., New Delhi.

M. Von Sperling, V.H Freire and C.A De Lemos Chernicharo, Performane Evalution of a UASBActivated Sludge System treating Municipal wastewater, Journal of Water Science and Technology,Vol.43,(2011), pp.323-328 M.Ji, J. Yu, H. Chen and P.L.Yue, Removal of slowly biodegradable COD in combined Thermophilic UASB and MBBR systems, Journal of Environmental Engineering, Vol.22, Issue 9, (2001), pp.1069-1079
90

Muhummad Asif, Latif, Rumana Gtrufran, Zularisam Abdul Wahid, Anwar Ahmad, Integrated application of Upflow Anaerobic Sludge Blanket Reactor for the treatment of wastewater, Journal of Water Resource,Vol.45, Issue16, 15 Oct (2011), pp. 4683-4699

M. Molinos-Senante, M. Garrido-Baserba , R. Reif , F. Hernndez-Sancho and M. Poch. Assessment of wastewater treatment plant design for small communities:Environmental and economic aspects, Science of the Total Environment 427428 (2012) 1118

Nidal Mahmoud, Grietje Zeeman, Hoob Gijzen, Gatze Lettinga, Anaerobic sewage treatment in one stage UASB reactor and a Combined UASB digestor system, Journal of Water Research, Vol.38, Issue 9, May(2004), pp.2348-2358

Operation and Manitenance Manual for Sewage Treatment Plant, Municipal Corporation, Chandigarh.

Priyanka Jamwal, Atul K. Mittal and Jean-Marie Mouchel. Efficiency evaluation of sewage treatment plants with different technologies in Delhi (India), Environ Monit Assess (2009) 153:293305

Pradip P. Kalbar, Subhankar Karmakar , Shyam R. Asolekar. Technology assessment for wastewater treatment using multiple-attribute decision-making, Technology in Society 34 (2012) 295302

Ravichandran.M and Joshua Amarnath.D. Performance Evaluation of Moving Bed Bio-Film Reactor Technology for Treatment of Domestic Waste Water in Industrial Area at MEPZ (Madras Exports Processing Zone), Tambaram, Chennai, India, Elixir Pollution 53 (2012) 11741-11744

Ravi Kumar, P., Liza Britta Pinto and Somashekar, R.k . Assessment of the efficiency of sewage treatment plants: A comparative study between Nagasandra and Mailasandra sewage treatment plant, Kathmandu University Journal of Science,Engineering and Technology, Vol.6,No. II, Nov, 2010,pp 115-125
91

R.A Barbosa and G.L Sant Anna Jr, Treatment of raw domestic sewage in an UASB reactor, Journal of Water Research, Vol.23, Issue 12, Dec(1989), pp.1483-1490 Siewhui Chong, Tushar kanti Sen, Ahmet kayadp and Ha Ming Ang, The performance enhancement of UASB for domestic Sludge treatment- A state of the art review, Journal of Water Research, Vol.46, Issue 11, July (2012), pp. 3434-3470 Sheng Chen, Dezhi Sun, and Jong-Shik Chung. Treatment of pesticide wastewater by moving-bed biofilm reactor combined with Fenton-coagulation pretreatment, Journal of Hazardous Materials 144 (2007) 577584

Swayer , Mc Carty and Parkin.Chemistry for environmental engineering and science, fifth edition , Tata Mc Graw Hill. S.K Garg. Sewage Disposal and Air Pollution Engineering, Environmental Engineering (Vol.II)

Wen K. Shieh and John D. Keenan, Fluidized Bed Biofilm reactor for wastewater treatment, Journal of Advances in Biochemical Engineering/Biotechnology, Vol.33, (1986), pp. 131-169

Water and wastewater testing (A laboratory manual), R.P Mathur.

Websites Referred APHA-AWWA-WPCF, Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, American Public Health Association www.apha.org Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) www.cpcb.nic.in Science Direct: www.sciencedirect.com Wikipedia www.wilipedia.org

92

Anda mungkin juga menyukai