Waste Water-Recycling System
Recycling” wastewater effluent accomplishes many critical factors. In factors 1 through 4, below, we compare our proposed system designs to construction of the acceptable technologies of wastewater processing in the offshore oil and gas industry (over the past 30 years).
- Reduction in the size of the wastewater tank(s) needed.
- By reducing size, weight requirements are reduced.
- By reducing weight (in steel) costs are reduced.
- By reducing size we, the “footprint” for the system is much smaller than a comparable capacity conventional (land-based) system.
Second, the concept is relatively easy: combine proven technologies that reduce or eliminate wastewater sludge (the most environmentally damaging part of a wastewater system) with a proven process that cleans and purifies the effluent (another environmentally damaging component).
- By use of an “extended aeration – activated sludge” digester (similar to the oil & gas industry) as the first component and as the primary component in wastewater processing (versus a typical land-based, conventional system which utilizes aeration near the end of its process);
- Enhancement of the aeration digester by spiking the forced air intake and when necessary increasing the enzyme and flock;
- Pulling from the (second process) clarifier sooner than the standard aeration process.
- Resulting in more suspended solids and higher e-coli are coming through the effluent;
- A special filter is provided to remove the suspended solids down to 5-microns; and then recycle the captured suspended solids back to the digester which adds more fuel to the enzymes.
- The remaining effluent is then run through awater purification process: eliminating parasites; removing hazardous chemicals; and killing bacteria and viruses. (The latter process ridding of the over-abundance of e-coli.)
This design concept results a “half-sized” system doing much better quality work and providing a truly “green” environment.
The first misconception people have is that if they aren’t going to drink the output effluent then they will save money by “not recycling.” False.
By not recycling we defeat the entire process of down-sizing and efficiency. Now we have to double the size of the wastewater process back to the older (antiquated) process and, further, we have to heavily soak the effluent with chlorine which is a contaminant and a creator of carcinogens.
- In a size and cost example, using a single container for just a wastewater digester and clarifier, such as the module components we would prescribe for a typical municipality (cluster)… without the recycler and purifier … the maximum configuration would be 32,000 gallons per day (or 120 m3/day). A 120 m3/day system WITH a recycler/purifier component the cost would be approximately “X” (basic system).
- To eliminate the recycling/ purifier process means that you need 24-hours of digesting (versus 12-hours with a recycler/ purifier), so the container would only process 16,000 gallons or 60 m3/day. To process 120 m3/day would make that cost become about “2X” …. add at least another 4-containers… plus an entire chlorinator processing component.
What is needed for increased efficiency is either a container which has all four of the components: digester, clarifier, recycler and purifier or a cluster of digester/clarifiers networked and connected to a central recycler/LS3.
For small volume needs, the former is what would be proposed; for larger municipal type systems, clusters in the latter design normally would be more efficient.
Operating costs for the this system run about $0.90 - $1.20 per 1,000 gallons… or $0.238 to $0.317 per m3.
