9420.pdf

More documents

Recommendations

Info

In-house modifications can result in a reduction of the contaminant load discharged from a plant but may not result in a reduction of the contaminant concentrations of the effluent. This is due to the fact that contaminant loadings and effluent flows may be reduced by similar margins. Therefore, effluents may continue to exceed discharge limitations or may exceed the limits above which surcharges have to be paid. 7.2.9 Wastewater Treatment Suppliers and manufacturers of wastewater treatment equipment were requested to provide cost estimates for equipment required to treat a range of flows. The type of treatment processes selected included fine screening using 600 mm, 500 mm, and 150 mm screens, and dissolved air flotation (DAF). The cost estimates were used to calculate the range of treatment costs per discharge flow (see Figure 7.3) A rule-of-thumb markup of 50% of the original cost estimates to account for taxes and installation was assumed for the calculations. The results are shown for the flow range of 100 m 3 /day to 6000 m3/day. Cost estimates for DAF do not include any sludge dewatering equipment, or the cost of waste disposal. Costs also exclude in-plant modifications to piping, yard work, power supply, and equipment housing which are site specific which can easily double the total capital cost. The efficiencies expected for each individual treatment option, shown in Table 7.3, are based on file data and literature values, as detailed process evaluations could not be obtained from the manufacturers/suppliers. The, efficiency of a particular wastewater treatment system is dependent on the nature of the wastewater to be treated. For example, with respect to screening, the treatment efficiency is dependent on the size distribution of the particles in the wastewater. If all particles (suspended solids) present in the wastewater are larger than the openings of the screen to be used, all particles and the BOD associated with them can be removed. Conversely, suspended solids removal may not increase much after the installation of finer screens, if the majority of the solids are too small to be retained by the screen. In addition, screens will not affect dissolved substances and the BOD which is associated with them. This dissolved BOD may, however, be removed by chemically assisted DAF.
100 _ 10 1 i 1 1 I I 1 I I I 1 I I I 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 FLOWRATE (m?day) DISSOLVED SCREENING SCREENING AIR FLOTATION (150um) (500um) FIGURE 7.3 TREATMENT COST PER DISCHARGE FLOW
Page 2 and 3:
Environment Canada Industrial Progr
Page 4 and 5:
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This document was
Page 6 and 7:
TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEM’EN
Page 8 and 9:
5.4 5.5 BEST 6.1 6.2 6.3 5.3.4.2 Ot
Page 10 and 11:
Figure 2.1 Figure 2.2 Figure 2.3 Fi
Page 12 and 13:
Table 5.8 Table 5.9 Table 5.10 Tabl
Page 14 and 15:
1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Terms of Referen
Page 16 and 17:
2 BACKGROUND INFORMATION 2.1 Genera
Page 18 and 19:
1992a). In 1990, approximately 70 %
Page 20 and 21:
Development of aquiculture (husband
Page 22 and 23:
REDUCTION PLANT Q \ \ PRINCE RUPERT
Page 24 and 25:
2.4 Review of Current Regulations 2
Page 26 and 27:
2.4.3 Municipal and Regional Bylaws
Page 28 and 29:
Table 3.1 Water Consumption Rates -
Page 30:
3.2 Wastewater Characteristics 3.2.
Page 33 and 34:
Table 3.4 Contaminant Concentration
Page 35 and 36:
3.2.2 Fish Processing Facilities in
Page 37 and 38:
Table 3.7 Production-based Contamin
Page 39 and 40:
which are permitted to grind and di
Page 41 and 42:
4 PROCESSING TECHNOLOGY The five ma
Page 43 and 44:
---- ,,, ,,, > “\ - Y’ I r ----
Page 45 and 46:
VESSEL-HOLD WATER PACKERS AND RECIR
Page 47 and 48:
&& a- * I ---- ————-— --
Page 49 and 50:
4.4 Herring Processing 4.4.1 Genera
Page 51 and 52:
Raw shrimp are held on ice for abou
Page 53 and 54:
~ PRODUCT — WASTEWATER ----- WATE
Page 55 and 56:
-+ \ /’WATER’l \~uPPLY/ ‘T-
Page 57 and 58:
5 WATER AND WASTE MANAGEMENT 5.1 Cu
Page 59 and 60: Information Grind and Discha Coarse
Page 61: Table 5.1 Permit Summary ———-
Page 64 and 65: offal with wastewater, which is the
Page 66 and 67: equipment clean and to flush offal
Page 68 and 69: Table 5.4 Solid Waste Generation at
Page 70 and 71: process water. However, different r
Page 72 and 73: 5.2.4 Contaminant Reduction Several
Page 74 and 75: Fine screening is generally used as
Page 76 and 77: to coagulate proteins, cooling and
Page 78 and 79: Table 5.6 Summary of FM Proceeding
Page 80 and 81: 5.3.4.3 Enhanced Gravity Settling T
Page 82 and 83: To the knowledge of the authors, on
Page 84 and 85: To the knowledge of the authors, no
Page 86 and 87: 5.3.6.2 Hydrocyclones Hydrocyclones
Page 88 and 89: Solid wastes generated by seafood p
Page 90 and 91: Table 5.10 Results of Applications
Page 92 and 93: 5.4.9 Bone Meal Experiment conducte
Page 94 and 95: The comporting operation consists o
Page 96 and 97: ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Page 98 and 99: ● / use of finer mesh screens (do
Page 100 and 101: 7 ECONOMIC ANALYSIS 7.1 Review of t
Page 102 and 103: wholesale and landed values as a me
Page 104 and 105: 7.2 Processing Technology Treatment
Page 106 and 107: (~nuJ!WU Jo %) SONICINVl u) (9 I <
Page 108 and 109: conservation and the implementation
Page 112 and 113: Table 7.3 Expected Efficiency of Wa
Page 114 and 115: Table 7.4 Assumptions used for Econ
Page 116 and 117: quo had been maintained. For each t
Page 118 and 119: All cost estimates involving DAF un
Page 120 and 121: meet toxicity limits. However, biol
Page 122 and 123: BIBLIOGRAPHY Aegis Management Servi
Page 124 and 125: Fukuda H. and H. Nakatani. Treatmen
Page 126 and 127: Johnson R.A. and S.M. Gallanger. Us
Page 128 and 129: NovaTec Consultants Inc.. Village o
Page 130: ( Takei M.. Treatment of Waste Wate
show all

9420.pdf

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?