Cost Effective use of UV-Peroxide for Geosmin and ... - Ohiowater.org

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Is AOP an option ‣ Performed desktop evaluation ‣ Contacted Trojan, Calgon, and Wedeco ‣ Evaluated capital, operating and lifecycle costs and compared to PAC option ‣ Wedeco reactors are LPHO and space was not available for the reactors ‣ Ozone AOPs not feasible due to cost of generators and size of generators
Desktop Evaluation (cont) ‣ If Ozone was being used for DBP control then Ozone-AOP would have merited additional consideration ‣ UV-Peroxide using medium pressure reactors were compact and used a maximum 5 mg/L of peroxide
Page 1 and 2: UV-Peroxide for Taste and Odor Cont
Page 3 and 4: Outline ‣ Describe Existing Nesha
Page 5 and 6: Case Study Neshaminy WTP ‣ Nesham
Page 7 and 8: Case Study Neshaminy WTP ‣ 1905:
Page 9 and 10: Operating Plan - 2006
Page 11 and 12: Proposed Neshaminy WTP Improvements
Page 13 and 14: T&O at Neshaminy ‣ Taste and odor
Page 15 and 16: Raw Water Quality (2009) ‣ Turbid
Page 17 and 18: MIB ‣ 2-Methyl-2-bornanol ‣ Abb
Page 19 and 20: Impact of Reduced Detention Time
Page 21 and 22: Plant Impacts of Testing ‣ 45 Min
Page 23 and 24: Costs Associated with PAC Option
Page 25: AOP 101 ‣ AOPs are based on gener
Page 29 and 30: Cost Comparison AOP vs PAC UV-H 2 O
Page 31 and 32: Tons of C02 Equivalents A Bit About
Page 33 and 34: Components of the UV-Hydrogen Perox
Page 35 and 36: UV Reactors (Continued) ‣ The sel
Page 37 and 38: Chemicals ‣ 50% Hydrogen Peroxide
Page 39 and 40: Neshaminy Site New Residuals Facili
Page 42 and 43: Construction ‣ Pre-Purchased UV-P
Page 44 and 45: Chemical Feed
Page 46 and 47: UV-Peroxide Startup ‣ Geosmin @ s
Page 48 and 49: Summary ‣ The Neshaminy UV/Peroxi
Page 50 and 51: Questions Contact Information John
Page 52 and 53: Application of UV-Peroxide @ Nesham
Page 54: Bench Testing of Filtered Water ‣

Cost Effective use of UV-Peroxide for Geosmin and ... - Ohiowater.org

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?