RBF_Cover (for eps) - National Water Research Institute

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Session 2: Operations Aquifer Storage and Recovery Pretreatment: Synergies of Bank Filtration, Ozonation, and Ultraviolet Disinfection Robert Stanley Cushing, Ph.D., P.E. Carollo Engineers Sarasota, Florida R. David G. Pyne, P.E. ASR Systems Gainesville, Florida David R. Wilkes, P.E. Jordan, Jones & Goulding Norcross, Georgia Introduction Aquifer Storage and Recovery (ASR) is a technique in which water is stored in subsurface aquifers during high-supply, low-demand periods for use during low-supply, high-demand periods. As indicated in Figure 1, water is pumped into a confined aquifer, displacing the native water, and forms a zone in the aquifer comprised primarily of injected water. Water is subsequently extracted from the aquifer when needed to supplement finished water-production capacity. Native Ground Water Buffer Zone Stored Water ASR Well Confining Layer Confining Layer Figure 1. Schematic representation of ASR. Stored Water Target Storage Volume Confining Layer Correspondence should be addressed to: Robert S. Cushing, Ph.D., P.E. Partner Carollo Engineers, P.C. 401 North Cattlemen Road • Suite 306 • Sarasota, Florida 34232 USA Phone: (941) 371-9832 • Fax: (941) 371-9873 • Email: RCushing@carollo.com Buffer Zone Native Ground Water 23
24 Traditionally, ASR has been used to store potable water to meet seasonal limitations in source-water supply or to optimize the use of water-treatment capacity. For example, the Peace River Regional Water Supply Authority in Florida draws and treats water from the Peace River at a rate limited by minimum flows and levels. By storing treated water through ASR during high river flow periods, the Authority has been able to more than double the usable yield from this source, while avoiding adverse impacts to sensitive downstream ecosystems. Mt. Pleasant Water Works in South Carolina supplements their water supply using reverse-osmosis treatment of brackish groundwater. ASR allows the reverse-osmosis plant to operate at a relatively constant rate, minimizing the production cost from this facility. Emerging ASR applications include storing water types other than finished potable water, including partially treated surface water and reclaimed wastewater, as well as different uses for ASR production water (such as water-treatment plant source-water, irrigation, and environmental applications). Biological and physiochemical processes during ASR storage can remove certain contaminants, including THMs and HAAs, leading to ASR applications that provide treatment, as well as storage. Water-quality goals for water to be injected into an ASR well vary with application. Generally, the least restrictive goal is to produce a water with chemical and particle characteristics that prevent excessive loss of permeability in the injection well aquifer. Some applications require injection water to meet primary (or public health-related drinking water) standards to protect aquifer quality or to meet ASR production requirements. Treatment to secondary or aesthetic water-quality standards may also be required. The most restrictive water-quality goals require treatment for trace, unregulated contaminants (e.g., low levels of endocrine disrupting compounds). Treatment system complexity, O&M requirements, and cost are all strongly related to source-water quality and finished water-quality goals, with ASR pretreatment costs ranging well over an order of magnitude, depending on the particular application. One general treatment approach for meeting ASR pretreatment goals consists of bank filtration followed by ozonation and/or UV disinfection (Figure 2). This process combination offers the improved reliability of a multiple-barrier approach while maintaining cost and operational efficiencies due to the synergistic nature of the individual unit processes. The following discussion provides a summary of treatability study results, engineering analysis, and cost-estimates for this process configuration. Lake Okeechobee Figure 2. Integrated bank filtration/ozonation/UV disinfection process train. Discussion Bank Filtration Ozone Contactor/ Reaction Basin UV Disinfection Traditional treatment approaches, such as membrane filtration or conventional treatment, produce process residuals that generally have substantial cost and operational implications. In addition, these traditional approaches require substantial chemicals for process O&M, an aspect
Page 1 and 2: 2RBF The National Water Research In
Page 3 and 4: Published by the NATIONAL WATER RES
Page 6: Foreword In 1999, the National Wate
Page 9 and 10: vi 1:30 pm Session 3B: Hydraulic As
Page 11 and 12: viii 1:15 pm Session 8: Emerging Co
Page 14 and 15: Acronyms ADA ß-alaninediacetic aci
Page 16: Conference Abstracts
Page 19 and 20: 2 conventional treatment train on c
Page 21 and 22: 4 The Louisville Water Company also
Page 23 and 24: 6 Treatment Capital Cost Annual O&M
Page 25 and 26: 8 design engineers needed to addres
Page 27 and 28: 10 Ohio River Pump Station Collecto
Page 29 and 30: 12 Figure 4. Wet/dry tunnel concept
Page 31 and 32: 14 The turbidity of well water is t
Page 34 and 35: Session 2: Operations Construction
Page 36 and 37: Land Surface lengths of well screen
Page 38: Summary Well systems can be constru
Page 43 and 44: 26 plans for a pilot-scale bank-fil
Page 46 and 47: Session 2: Operations Evolution fro
Page 48 and 49: Today, Cedar Rapids obtains all of
Page 50: REFERENCES AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The
Page 53 and 54: 36 source of most nitrate detected
Page 55 and 56: 38 Hallberg, G.R., D.G. Riley, J.R.
Page 57 and 58: 40 Two 10-MGD capacity pumps were i
Page 60 and 61: Session 3: Hydraulic Aspects Pluggi
Page 62 and 63: iverbed scouring. This analysis sho
Page 64: REFERENCES Schafer, D.C. (2003).
Page 67 and 68: 50 TS GWA Tegel TS Wannsee TS Tegel
Page 69 and 70: 52 contains the lowest concentratio
Page 71 and 72: 54 δ 18 O [ 0⁄00 versus Standard
Page 73 and 74: 56 Acknowledgements We would like t
Page 75 and 76: 58 Phase 1 Investigations Once the
Page 77 and 78: 60 pumping is discontinued and the
Page 80 and 81: Session 4: Siting Water-Quality Man
Page 82 and 83: Torgau Case Study The highly produc
Page 84 and 85: The mean concentration in the “mi
Page 86 and 87: Session 5: Dynamics Using Models to
Page 88 and 89: source of induced infiltration to t
Page 90 and 91:
affect the amount of contaminant en
Page 92 and 93:
intuitive system behavior. In the c
Page 94 and 95:
entering the well can be carried ou
Page 96:
Ray, C., T.W. Soong, Y.Q. Lian, and
Page 99 and 100:
82 Riverbank Filtration Near Torgau
Page 101 and 102:
84 drinking-water quality. Drinking
Page 104 and 105:
Session 5: Dynamics Temporal Change
Page 106 and 107:
• Equalization of fluctuating con
Page 108 and 109:
Session 5: Dynamics An Update of th
Page 110 and 111:
Session 5: Dynamics On Bank Filtrat
Page 112 and 113:
Figure 2. Streamlines for two wells
Page 114 and 115:
well galleries near the Unterhavel
Page 116 and 117:
Dinner Presentation Hydraulic Sensi
Page 118 and 119:
conductivity k (especially of the r
Page 120 and 121:
parameter value: Figure 6. Initial
Page 122 and 123:
Keynote Presentation Riverbank Filt
Page 124 and 125:
esulted in a significant improvemen
Page 126 and 127:
Fritz, B. (2002). Uferfiltration un
Page 128 and 129:
Session 6: Microorganisms Using Mic
Page 130 and 131:
was independent of finished water t
Page 132 and 133:
Session 6: Microorganisms Transport
Page 134 and 135:
Session 6: Microorganisms Laborator
Page 136 and 137:
Cryptosporidium are unreliable, lab
Page 138 and 139:
Pathogen Concentration (pathogens/1
Page 140 and 141:
Session 6: Microorganisms Fate of D
Page 142 and 143:
treatment train optimized for turbi
Page 144 and 145:
Acknowledgements We gratefully ackn
Page 146 and 147:
Session 6: Microorganisms Assessmen
Page 148 and 149:
screens along the entire lateral le
Page 150 and 151:
Table 3. Average Distribution of Ri
Page 152 and 153:
Location Number of Sampling Events
Page 154 and 155:
Session 7: Organics Removal Riverba
Page 156 and 157:
uncontaminated groundwater could le
Page 158 and 159:
Sacher, F., H.-J. Brauch, and W. K
Page 160 and 161:
Session 7: Organics Removal Organic
Page 162 and 163:
TOC (mg/L) 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Site 1
Page 164 and 165:
Conclusions RBF is very effective i
Page 166 and 167:
Lunch Presentation Potential Uses o
Page 168 and 169:
Session 8: Emerging Contaminants Re
Page 170 and 171:
H 3C O O N N H3C N CH3 Cl AMDOPH Be
Page 172 and 173:
Page 174 and 175:
Results and Conclusion The Santa An
Page 176 and 177:
Page 178 and 179:
echarge is not well understood. Our
Page 180 and 181:
Page 182 and 183:
The MS conditions were as follows:
Page 184 and 185:
Session 9: Public Policy and Regula
Page 186 and 187:
FEET 1,000 900 800 700 600 VERTICAL
Page 188 and 189:
The surficial aquifers in Midwester
Page 190 and 191:
Page 192 and 193:
Page 194 and 195:
that multiple samples should be eva
Page 196 and 197:
turbidity. Endospores, Giardia, Cry
Page 198 and 199:
Session 9: Public Policy and Regist
Page 200 and 201:
For the first phase of the Dyje Pro
Page 202 and 203:
Concentration mg.l 1 60 50 40 30 20
Page 204 and 205:
Session 11: Case Studies “Lessons
Page 206 and 207:
Concentration (mg/L) 35 30 25 20 15
Page 208 and 209:
REFERENCE Koterba, M.T, F.D. Wilde,
Page 210 and 211:
Page 212 and 213:
REFERENCES Laszlo , F., and Z. Homo
Page 214 and 215:
Page 216 and 217:
Figure 2. A sketch of the study are
Page 218 and 219:
By analyzing the δ 15 N-NO 3 of si
Page 220 and 221:
Page 222 and 223:
Microbial growth was weak in all la
Page 224 and 225:
Page 226 and 227:
Objectives The aim of the study was
Page 228 and 229:
6000 4000 2000 Suspended Solids (mg
Page 230 and 231:
REFERENCES American Public Health A
Page 232 and 233:
show all

RBF_Cover (for eps) - National Water Research Institute

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?