Search results

Wastewater Monitoring

This chaptes proposes a methodology for the section monitoring locations for wastewater quality monitoring, based on (pre-) screening, a quick scan monitoring campaign, and final selection of location and design of the monitoring setup.

Thermal disinfection of hospital wastewater in a pilot‑scale continuous‑flow system

Thermal disinfection is probably the oldest water treatment method ever used. Similarly to other disinfection processes, it targets the inactivation of pathogenic (micro)organisms present in water, wastewater and other media. In this work, a pilot-scale continuous-flow thermal disinfection system was investigated using highly contaminated hospital wastewater as influent without any pre-treatment step for turbidity removal. The results proved that the tested system can be used with influent turbidity as high as 100 NTU and still provide up to log 8 microbial inactivation. Further results have shown energy consumption comparable to other commercially available thermal disinfection systems and relatively low influence on the investigated physical–chemical parameters.

Comparison of the microbial communities in anaerobic digesters treating high alkalinity synthetic wastewater at atmospheric and high-pressure (11 bar)

High-pressure anaerobic digestion is an appealing concept since it can upgrade biogas directly within the reactor. However, the decline of pH caused by the dissolution of CO2 is the main barrier that prevents a good operating high-pressure anaerobic digestion process. Therefore, in this study, a high-pressure anaerobic digestion was studied to treat high alkalinity synthetic wastewater, which could not be treated in a normal-pressure anaerobic digester. In the high-pressure reactor, the pH value was 7.5 ~ 7.8, and the CH4 content reached 88% at 11 bar. Unlike its normal-pressure counterpart (2285 mg/L acetic acid), the high-pressure reactor ran steadily (without volatile fatty acids inhibition). Furthermore, the microbial community changed in the high-pressure reactor. Specifically, key microbial guilds (Syntrophus (11.2%), Methanosaeta concilii (50.9%), and Methanobrevibacter (26.8%)) were dominant in the high-pressure reactor at 11 bar, indicating their fundamental roles under high-pressure treating high alkalinity synthetic wastewater.

Smooth Traffic Management - Haalbaarheidsstudie

Met de toenemende drukte in de stad neemt ook het autogebruik toe. Deze toename zorgt voor extra druk op de veiligheid en gezondheid voor mens en natuur. Om de negatieve impact van verkeer te mitigeren kan gekeken worden naar strengere eisen aan hinder en uitstoot. Met Smooth Traffic Management (STM) wordt gewerkt aan het verminderen van de negatieve verkeerseffecten rond ‘gevoelige locaties’ door bestuurders middels een navigatiesysteem een alternatieve, omgevingsbewuste route aan te bieden.

Final market system maps - assessments of barriers to WATERMINING technologies and how to clear these

The WATERMINING project aims to bring solutions to improve the circularity of water treatment and the resulting by-products of these processes. Achieving a deep understanding of the barriers potentially hindering the development of circular water solutions is crucial to design policies that enable the deployment of these techniques. To do this, the WATERMINING project organizes Communities of Practice (CoPs), where stakeholders from the WATERMINING case study projects analysed these market barriers and proposal (policy) measures to clear these.CoPs in the case studies of Lampedusa in Italy and Almería in Spain focused on sea water desalination. The case studies of Faro-Olhão in Portugal, Larnaca in Cyprus and La Llagosta in Spain have been discussed by CoP stakeholders in terms of barriers in circular urban wastewater treatment. The CoP in the Netherlands focused on circular industrial waste water treatment at the Westlake plant at Rotterdam. The barriers defined by the stakeholders in the CoPs were discussed by the WATERMINING partners at the consortium meeting in Palermo (Italy, September 2022), and presented at the WATERMINING Market and Policy workshop in Brussels (Belgium, February 2023).Addressing the three above-mentioned categories of circular water solutions, common barriers identified across all WATERMINING’s case studies are the following. First, stakeholders report a lack of incentives to implement circular solutions, as mainstream linear practices are generally cheaper.This could be addressed by de-encouraging linear techniques by making the disposal of their byproducts (such as brine) more expensive. Another solution could be to provide added value to circular solutions through the monetization of their additional products and services. Subsidies can support in lowering production costs or prices of materials recovered from sea- and wastewater treatment to level the playing field with conventionaly derived material.Another commonly mentioned barrier is the difficulty to introduce products obtained from circular water treatment in the market, both because of a lack of public acceptance and legal constraints stemming from products being regarded as waste. Information campaigns and the revision of current regulatory frameworks to allow these products entering the market would expand the revenue sources from these techniques and improve the circularity of the system. Standardising the circular water treatment technologies in the market could support this, whereby best available techniques reference documents of the EU (BREFs) could be an effective instrument, especially when tapping into an ongoing BREF writing or updating process.Across the case studies and replication studies it has been mentioned that current legislation in case study countries exclude ‘watermined’ products from food and/or other applications. Criteria for endof-waste status of ‘watermined’ products, which would determine whether a product, such as Kaumera which is produced from urban wastewater treatment, is eligible as a fertiliser in agriculture, are usually determined at the level of the EU, but Member States could interpret these more stringently (Member State-level criteria cannot be weaker than the EU-level ones). In this respect it has been recommended to enhance knowledge exchange across Member States, e.g., by creating anEU-based unit (or competencies within an existing unit) to promote cooperation among EU Member States and regional authorities concerning the production, sale and use of products recovered from wastewater treatment.Another common perception stakeholders report is the widespread conservatism in the water sector. Water treatment actors traditionally have a focus on purifying water and supplying this to the market. Generating products from waste streams is often something that market actors are less familiar with. Among other solutions, the ‘Dutch model’ has been recommended as a way to create national centres for the development of knowledge and technology for water management, which would serve as an R&D accelerator.

Facility Management