Unique Water Quality Challenges of the Sheyenne River:Unique Water...

6/24/2014

1

Unique Water Quality Challenges of the Sheyenne River:Unique Water Quality Challenges of the Sheyenne River: A Comparative Pilot Study of Three MF/UF Systems

Qigang Chang, PhD, PE, AE2STroy Hall, Fargo Water Utility Director

Co-authors: Brian Bergantine Scott Freeman Bo Johnston Mark Peterson and Dave Buchholz

Surface Water Treatment Workshop 2014 1

Brian Bergantine, Scott Freeman, Bo Johnston, Mark Peterson, and Dave Buchholz

PRESENTATION OUTLINE

• Project Background

• MF/UF Pilot Study– Pilot Study Setup– Pilot Study Findings

K D i P t


• Key Design Parameter Evaluation

6/24/2014

2

Fargo Water Treatment Plant (WTP) in operation since 1912

INTRODUCTION TO FARGO WTP

Current WTP completed in 1997 with a capacity of 30 million gallons per day (mgd) Lime softening treatment plant

Built to meet primary drinking water regulations

Utilizes additional treatment technologies to provide aesthetically pleasing water


Expandable to 45 mgd

Does not remove sulfates

WTP utilizes multiple

Lake AshtabulaFargo’s Appropriation35,880 Acre-Feet

FARGO SOURCEWATER SUPPLIES

WTP utilizes multiple water sources Recommended by

Professional Organizations

Redundancy for water quality variations

Drought and water shortage preparedness

Red RiverFargo’s Appropriation109,500 Acre-Feet

Sheyenne RiverFargo’s Appropriation7,000 Acre-Feet


Manage treatment operations

Minimize chemical use and cost

Control taste and odor events

6/24/2014

3

D il L k t h

IMPACT FROM DEVILS LAKE

Devils Lake water has high concentrations of TDS:

Sulfate

Bromide

Hardness

Discharges from

1984


Devils Lake elevate concentrations of these component in the Sheyenne River

2010

Devils Lake water has high concentrations of total

Devils Lake and Devils Lake and Sheyenne River Water Quality Sheyenne River Water Quality

Devils Lake water has high concentrations of total

dissolved solids (TDS). Components problematic for

drinking water treatment include:

Sulfate

Bromide (Bromate byproduct of ozonation)


Hardness

Discharges from Devils Lake elevate concentrations of these component in the Sheyenne River

6

6/24/2014

4

- Negative impact to taste- Laxative effect on consumers - Negative impact to taste- Laxative effect on consumers

SULFATE IN DRINKING WATER

• EPA Secondary Standard for Sulfate = 250 mg/L

• North Dakota Department of Health Recommends < 250 mg/L of Sulfate in Drinking Water

• Sheyenne River Sulfate Expected to be 750 mg/L


• Sheyenne River Sulfate Expected to be 750 mg/L (sulfate concentration was 894 mg/L on April 1, 2013)

• Fargo current WTP CANNOT provide sulfate treatment without additional treatment technologies

Primary Objective Address Changing Water Quality in

Fargo WTP Facility PlanFargo WTP Facility Plan

Sheyenne River

Secondary Objective Explore Opportunities to Provide

Capacity For Long-Term Growth


6/24/2014

5

Fargo WTP Facility PlanFargo WTP Facility Plan

• Fargo WTP Facility Plan Completed by AE2S and B&V in 2011

• Reverse Osmosis (RO) Recognized as Appropriate Technology for Sulfate Reduction

• Two Preferred Alternatives– Polishing RO after Existing WTP– Integrated Membrane (MF/UF + RO) Parallel to Existing WTP

• Recommended RO Pilot Study



• Fargo WTP Facility Plan Completed by AE2S and B&V in 2011

FARGO WTP FACILITY PLAN

• Facility Plan Objective– Water Quality: Address Changing Water Quality in Sheyenne River– Water Quantity: Expand Capacity For Long-Term Growth

• Reverse Osmosis (RO) Recognized as Appropriate Technology for Sulfate Reduction

• Two Preferred Alternatives


• Two Preferred Alternatives– Polishing RO after Existing WTP– Integrated Membrane (MF/UF + RO) Parallel to Existing WTP


6/24/2014

6

• RO pilot study

RO PILOT STUDY

• RO pilot study performed in 2011 & 2012


Polishing Scenario

REVERSE OSMOSIS

SOURCEWATER

DISTRIBUTION EXISTING WTP

RO Pilot RO Pilot Study ScenariosStudy Scenarios

Parallel Scenario

OSMOSIS(Sulfate Reduction)

Concentrate

SOURCE

EXISTING WTPDISTRIBUTION

WATER EXISTING WTP


Residuals

MEMBRANE FILTRATION

SOURCEWATER

Residuals

PLATE SETTLERS(Pretreatment)

REVERSE OSMOSIS

(Sulfate Reduction)

Concentrate

6/24/2014

7

RO Pilot RO Pilot StudyStudy•Proved the Feasibility of RO Membrane •Tested Individual Performance of RO Elements•Evaluated Key Design Parameters•Provided Fargo WTP Staff with Membrane Experience


45 d30 d

FARGO MEMBRANE WTP OVERVIEW

Fargo Membrane WTP: 15 mgd

RED RIVER

DISTRIBUTIONSYSTEM

RO

15 mgd

PRETREATMENT(9.5 MGD)

MF/UF

T&O CONTROL(3 MGD)

45 mgd

DISINFECTION

FROM EXISTING LIME-SOFTENING WTP30 mgd


SHEYENNE RIVER

RO(12.0 MGD)

CONCENTRATE DISPOSAL

2.5 mgd

PRETREATMENT(9.5 MGD)

MF/UF(18.2 MGD)

0.9 mgd

RESIDUALS TREATMENT

FACILITY

6/24/2014

8

• Objectives– Evaluate various membranes treating the Sheyenne River

– Establish key design and operating parameters

MF/UF PILOT STUDY

Establish key design and operating parameters• Membrane flux, recovery, backwash, maintenance wash (MW), and clean-in-

place (CIP) procedures and intervals, as well as verifying turbidity removal, low rate of fiber breakage, and direct integrity test procedures

– Assist Fargo WTP staff in learning about membrane filtration


Pretreatment

MEMBRANE TECHNOLOGYMEMBRANE TECHNOLOGY

HOW DO MEMBRANES WORK?MEMBRANES WORK?


6/24/2014

9

MEMBRANE TECHNOLOGYMEMBRANE TECHNOLOGYTYPES OF MEMBRANES

LOW PRESSUREMF & UF Removes:

Turbidity

Vi

HIGH PRESSURENF & RO Removes:

Turbidity

Microfiltration(MF)

Ultrafiltration(UF)

Nanofiltration(NF)

Reverse Osmosis(RO)

Smallest Pore Size


Viruses

Bacteria

Protozoa

• Organics

Viruses

Bacteria

Protozoa

Organics

InorganicsRemoval • Partial Removal

MEMBRANE TECHNOLOGY MEMBRANE TECHNOLOGY IMPLEMENTATIONIMPLEMENTATION

CUMULATIVE CAPACITY OF US MUNICIPAL DESALINATION PLANT


Mike Mickley, U.S. municipal desalination plant statistics and concentrate management practices and issue, 2012

6/24/2014

10

MF/UF MEMBRANE CHARACTERISTICS

Module Model Number

ZeeWeed 1000 UNA-620A L20N

Type of Membrane Submerged Encased

Material of membrane fiber

PVDF

Surface area per each


Surface area per each membrane module, ft2

(m2)550 (51) 538 (50) 375 (35)

Nominal pore size, (µm)

0.02 0.1 0.04

Sheyenne River1 Temperature swings widely

PILOT TESTING PILOT TESTING PROGRAM SCENARIOSPROGRAM SCENARIOS

1. Temperature swings widely2. High TOC3. High alkalinity4. High sulfate5. Water quality changing rapidly

30


0

5

10

15

20

25

1/1/2005 7/1/2005 1/1/2006 7/1/2006 1/1/2007 7/1/2007 1/1/2008 7/1/2008 1/1/2009 7/1/2009 1/1/2010 7/1/2010

Deg

rees

Cel

siu

s

Date

6/24/2014

11

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONWater Quality

Sh RiSheyenne River1. Temperature swings widely2. High TOC3. High alkalinity4. High sulfate5. Water quality changing rapidly


RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONWater Quality

Temperature swings widelyOC

SHEYENNE RIVER RAW WATER

SETTLED WATER

pH 7 8 8 5 7 2 7 8

1. High TOC2. High alkalinity3. High sulfate4. Water quality changing rapidly


pH 7.8-8.5 7.2-7.8

Temperature (°C) 1.0-28 1.0-28

TOC (mg/L) 7.3-16 5.5-9.4

Turbidity (NTU) 10-700Typical: <3

Maximum: <9

6/24/2014

12

30

SHEYENNE RIVER WATER TEMPERATURE

10

15

20

25

Deg

rees

Cel

siu

s


0

5

1/1/2005 7/1/2005 1/1/2006 7/1/2006 1/1/2007 7/1/2007 1/1/2008 7/1/2008 1/1/2009 7/1/2009 1/1/2010 7/1/2010

Date

TRANSMEMBRANE PRESSUREMembrane A


6/24/2014

13

TRANSMEMBRANE PRESSUREMembrane B


TRANSMEMBRANE PRESSUREMembrane B

m

0 0.1 0.2

Pore size

∆P

Rm


6/24/2014

14

TRANASMEMBRANE PRESSUREMembrane C


TEMPERATURE CORRECTED PERMEABILITY


6/24/2014

15

TEMPERATURE CORRECTED PERMEABILITY


MEMBRANE CLEAN-IN-PLACE

• Sodium Hypchlorite: 600-2000 mg/L

Cit i A id 1 2% ( H 2)• Citric Acid: 1-2% (pH 2)

• Temperature: 70-100 degree F


6/24/2014

16

CIP EFFECTIVENESS


KEY DESIGN PARAMETER EVALUATION

Design Flux?


6/24/2014

17

KEY DESIGN PARAMETER EVALUATION

Factors:

Design Flux?

Factors:

• Design Capacity

• Membrane Life Time

• Allowable Annual Permeability Loss

• Lowest Water Temperature


• Max Allowable TMP

• …

DESIGN FLUX EVALUATION

Minimum Membrane Permeability at 20 °C (gfd/psi)

Design Flux (gfd)

Annual Flux Loss (percent)

Membrane Life Time (year)

Permeabilitymin@20°C:

Flux:

A:

n:


Maximum Operation Transmembrane Pressure (psi)

Lowest Water Temperature (°C)

TMPm:

T:

6/24/2014

18

Example


Example

Flux: 35 gfdA= 0.05TMPm= 21.7 psiT=0.5 °C


n = 10 (year)

6/24/2014

19

Design Flux 34 gfd: 4.93 gfd/psi

Example

Design Flux 30 gfd: 4 34 gfd/psi


4.34 gfd/psi

FACILITY PLAN

RO PILOTSTUDY

PRELIMINARY DESIGN

AND MF/UF

FINALDESIGN

BIDDING

PROJECT STATUS

2010 20122011

PLAN STUDY AND MF/UF PROCUREMENT

DESIGN CONSTRUCTION

2013 2014


2010 20122011

WHERE WE ARE

2013 2014

6/24/2014

20

FARGO WTP SITE


Fargo

FARGO MEMBRANE WTP SITE13th Avenue South

N

Fargo Membrane

WTP

Str

eet

So

uth


Existing WTP

5th

S

6/24/2014

21

FARGO MEMBRANE WTP RENDERING


Qigang Chang, PhD PE Project Engineer

Troy HallFargo Water Utility Director

QUESTIONS?

oject g ee

AE2S3101 Frontage Road SouthMoorhead, MN 56560

[email protected]

V i 218 299 5610

g y

Fargo Water Treatment Plant 435 14 Ave. S.Fargo, ND 58103

[email protected]

V i 701 476 6741


Voice: 218.299.5610 Fax: 218.299.5611

Voice: 701.476.6741 Fax: 701.241.8110

WWW.AE2S.COMThank You!

Unique Water Quality Challenges of the Sheyenne River:Unique Water...

Documents

Transcript of Unique Water Quality Challenges of the Sheyenne River:Unique Water...