Coconut Husk Fragments-Based BiofiltrationEnsuring the Availability and Sustainability of Filtering Media Materials

Andy McKinlayMarket development directorResidentialNorth America

Content

Review of our Current Offer Premier Tech Aqua (PTA) Maintenance Program Review of Current Options to Homeowners and

Regulators Veolia Test Platform Real Facts Comparative Research Energy Consumption & Annual Operating Costs Filter Replacement & Spent Peat Studies New Offer

Ecoflo Biofilter is a peat-based biofilter Life span of the filtering media: 10 to 15 years

Ecoflo Biofilter

Septic tank

Drainfield

Ecoflo®

Biofilter

Performed by a network of local partners trained by PTA

Good presentation to the customer

Professionalism on the property

Inspection of all components

Good and complete information

PTA Maintenance Program

Maintenance Steps

What is the current offer?

Operation and Maintenance

Apply to ALL septic systems

No maintenance = progressive system failure Conventional, mound, buried CTDS (non accessible)

If you are unable to visually inspect the components of a system, you do not know if it is working Conventional, mound, buried CTDS (non accessible)

Replacing a failed system is an operating cost How long it actually lasts is a mystery!

Performance????? Inspections?????

Veolia Test Platform

To reflect the high variations of flow and loads, characterizing individual installations, Veolia Water developed, with expert groups, a new testing protocol.

Q12 weeks

Week-end high occupancy 4 weeks

Peak flow3 weeks

Vacation period

3 weeks

Week-end high occupancy

2 weeks

Q4 weeks

Low occupancy

2 weeks

3 power/equipment failure 6 weeks

100%

200%

50%

Veolia Test Platform

In 2011, Veolia Eau performed the 40-week Stressful Condition Test Platform at the Center for Scientific and Technical Building Studies in Europe.

Most stringent test platform in the onsite wastewater industry.

Ecoflo Biofilter ranked no. 1 among the eight technologies tested.

Veolia Protocol Global Results

Veolia Protocol Global Results

Veolia Protocol Global Results

Veolia Protocol Global Results

Veolia Protocol Global Results

The Real Facts

Comparative Research

Comparative Research

The higher maintenance requirements of ATU’s were often neglected by homeowners, resulting in higher failure and marginal performance rates.

Conclusions When ATU’s are included in the design system, failure rates increase. When ATU’s are designed to discharge off-lot, the nuisance rate increase.

Energy Consumption

Vendor 1 yr Electrical Consumption (kWh/year)

Increased Electrical Costs per Year Assuming $0.11 per kWh

Verified by

Fixed film 979.66 $107.76 NAT testing lab

Fixed film 1934.5 kWh/year $212.80 Vendor

Attached Growth 2584 kWh/year $284.24 Pump Manufacturer

BC Hydro Rates and Usage

ATU#1 – 7.728 kWh (daily usage) ATU#2 – 4.8 kWh (daily usage) ATU#3 – 4.248 kWh (daily usage)

1,350 kWh over typical 2 month billing period = 22.1918 kWh (daily usage)

Average Annual Operating Costs

Assuming blower replacement at 5-year intervals Does not include annual maintenance costs or other

component replacement (eg. recirculation pump, diffuser, etc.)

Accumulative Operating Costs

The Real Facts

One Ecoflo biofiter (at the time of media replacement) contains a volume of media between 4 and 4.5m³, or approximately 3.6 dry tonnes.

It’s estimated that the volume of biosolids produced annually by centralized wastewater treatment plants in BC is approximately 47,000 dry tonnes.

The Real Facts

Permanent vs. Temporary Systems

System replacement costs expressed as annual operating costs Assuming temporary system total replacement cost of $15K Ecoflo media replaced at 10-year intervals

Operation & Maintenance Costs – Ecoflo vs. ATU 1 yr 2 yr 3 yr 4 yr 5 yr 6 yr 7 yr 8 yr

Ecoflo

Annual maintenance fees Free $150.00 $150.00 $150.00 $150.00 $150.00 $150.00 $150.00 Annual electricity costs* $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 *Less than $10/yr if pump is required

$1,500.00

Filter replacement Total operating costs after 8 years

$2,550.00

Average annual costs $318.75

ATU

Annual maintenance fees (estimated)

Free Free $200.00 $200.00 $200.00 $200.00 $200.00 $200.00

Annual electricity costs (estimated)

$300.00 $300.00 $300.00 $300.00 $300.00 $300.00 $300.00 $300.00

Compressor replacement/rebuild (estimated)

$400.00 $400.00

Pump scum/sludge from ATU (estimated)

$250.00

Total operating costs after 8 years

$4,650.00

Average annual costs $518.25

From Theory to Reality: Peat replacement after 8 Years – Characterization Resultsand the Challenges of Finding NewEnd Uses

Presented by

Andy McKinlayDenis Pettigrew

PUMPER & CLEANER ENVIRONMENTAL EXPO INTERNATIONAL Louisville, Kentucky, February 25th, 2010

When the life span of the filter is reached, the spent media is pumped out with a vacuum pump truck

Filter Replacement

Sludge requires to be managed periodically All onsite wastewater treatment systems produce sludge ATU’s: sludge is accumulated in the settling area and

needs to be pumped on a 1 to 2 year basis Media filter bed: sludge is accumulated in the filtering

media, requiring its replacement over the years

Filter Replacement

First study in 2002-2005 in Canada Characterization of spent peat Storage, composting and revegetation trials Lime stabilization Soil amendment for tree nursery

Second study by Virginia Tech University (since 2008) Characterization of spent peat Standard bioassay trials (laboratory and greenhouse) Storage (Penn State University) and composting trials

Spent Peat Studies

2002 and 2003: Sampling of 19 filtering beds after 8 years of use

2009: sampling of 10 filtering beds in PA after 8 years of use

Sample volume 2-3 gal (5-10 L)

Parameters Uniformity and texture Physico-chemical properties Macro-elements Oligo-elements & metals Microbiology

Characterization Campaign

Monitor the impact of storage & evaluate new alternative end uses:

1. Storage & composting Use of spent peat as a bulking agent in compost Effect of storage on pathogen reduction and leachate

characterization Composting trials with addition of a nitrogen source

2. Erosion control and revegetation (first study only) Organic amendment for the protection & stabilization of degraded

soils (erosion control on sloppy site) Agronomic potential for plant growth on altered/degraded sites Monitor possible run-off contamination resulting from application

of spent peat as an organic amendment

Storage, Composting & Re-vegetation Trials

Storage & Composting Trials

Existing leachate storage lagoon

Virginia Tech study First exploration drum composting

trials 2009 Second run composting trials and

storage trials to be initiated in spring 2010

First study: storage and composting platform (100 x 30 ft) divided in 4 cells

Erosion control and re-vegetation trials using 22 plots of 8 x 21ft:

Re-vegetation Trials

2 slopes: 3 and 25% Comparison of amended vs.

control plots (3-5 reps) Collection of run-off water and

sediments at the bottom of each plots

Plant growth evolution Weather station

Designed to test for beneficial effects of spent peat as an amendment and to observe any potential negative effects on soil properties and plant growth.

Bioassay at Virginia Tech Facilities

Seed germination and greenhouse pots trials Plant sensitive and tolerance indicators (Snap beans and Tall

fescue) 2 amendment materials:

Spent peat VT compost mix (with spent peat)

4 application rates (0,10, 20 and 30%) Randomized block (4 reps/treatment)

Good physical, chemical and agronomical properties:

pH close to neutral 84% of organic matter (≈40% of carbon

content) C/N ratio in the range of 35 Homogenous fibrous and porous structure High water holding capacity

Characterization Campaign

Overall results Same spent peat characteristics observed

from the 2 studies (Canada and USA)

Good physical, chemical and agronomical properties:

Good plant nutritional mineral content (macro & available nutrients)

Moderate level of pathogen (E. coli range of 24 to 100,000 MPN/g, Salmonella (BDL))

Compared to sewage sludge, very low metals content

Higher level of Cu and Na, can be found in certain sites (water softner, aggressive water and copper plumbing)

Characterization Campaign

Overall results (cont’)

Stabilization with hydrated lime to get Class A biosolid level Get the pathogen reduction through pH and heat drastic change

Lime Stabilization

Preliminary trials

pH > 11.5 for more than 22hrs

Erosion control & re-vegetation Significant contribution of the amendment of spent peat (A) for

erosion control as well as for the establishment of the vegetation cover.

A

14 d

A

21 d

A8 months

A

10 months A

12 months

A

38 d

Re-vegetation Trials

Sediments volume & leachate quality

ParametersNon

amendedAmended

Sediments volume (mL) 254 118

Turbidity (NTU) 386 47

Conductivity (mho/cm) 159 90

Fe (mg/L) 11.4 1.2

COD (mg/L) 43 48

PO4 (mg/L) 0.11 0.57

Fecal Coliforms (UFC/100 mL)

156 55

Cu (mg/L) 0.05 0.05

NH4 (mg/L) 0.29 0.37

Re-vegetation Trials

Erosion control & re-vegetation

Bioassay at Virginia Tech Facilities

Seed germination and greenhouse pots trials

Land Reclamation

Reclamation Objectives Highly disturbed throughout site Dust mitigation / erosion control Aesthetic improvement Habitat establishment Aforestation

Biosolids identified as a tool to achieve these objectives

Spent peat, with its inherent physical properties and mineral nutrients concentrations, has great fertilizing potential for plant growth and for soil stabilization and enrichment.

The simple storage trials of the spent peat for periods > 80 days contributes to a sufficient level of stabilization.

The stabilized spent peat could be used for forage crop and forestry (tree farms).

Composting trials demonstrated the very high potential of reusing the spent peat as a bulking agent.

Conclusions

Re-vegetation trials have demonstrated the beneficial contribution of the spent peat amendment for the protection of bare surfaces and the establishment of a vegetation cap.

First results from Virginia Tech study (bioassay) indicate that spent peat amendment has no adverse effects on seedling and improve plant growth.

Based on results obtained up to now, spent peat should not be classified as a sewage sludge (septage), considering its handling and agronomical properties (low elemental toxicity).

Conclusions

Ecoflo

Ecoflo Coco

Compact absorbent organic filter

PT Compact Organic Filter is made of quality- controlled natural media

Zero energy required for the treatment process

Filter acts as a true physical barrier between the existing soil and the absorption bed

A compact, high-performance, no energy and permanent solution

Easy to install system

Best way to protect the investment (the property) and the environment

Finished productBranding

Premier Tech Compact Organic Filter

Premier Tech offers a technological approach

Proven and recognized technology

Coco – Advantages

Natural and recyclable organic filter Same module can handle more flow or more

concentration Increased treatment flexibility and compactness

Ecoflo Coco vs. Ecoflo

Ecoflo Coco Ecoflo

HLR 12.5 USG/ft²-d 8.6 USG/ft²-d

OLR 0.012lb DBOC5/ft2-d 0.009lb DBOC5/ft2-d

FM height 25 in 31.5 in

Polyethylene (570/750 unit)

Q=750 USG/d

Q=525 USG/d

NSF Testing – Standard 40 Class I

Completed May 15, 2014

Secondary treatment:

Ecoflo® Coco Filter

Primary treatment:

750 gallons working capacity septic tank

Septic tank effluent sampling port

Discharge to bench test sampling point

Filtering media

PL-22 Effluent filter Influent coming

from bench test

Spacers1

Aeration pipes

NSF Testing – Standard 40 Class I

Completed May 15, 2014

New Unit

Compact rotomolded unit

The Strength of Premier Tech Aqua

Network of 2,000 installers, 700 consultants, 250 service partners and 420 distribution centers in North America, Europe and Asia

100,000 Ecoflo Biofilter installations worldwide

1,200 commercial, community, institutional, municipal and industrial installations

400,000 system maintenances

13,000 successful filter changes

120,000 peripheral products sold