Environmental Engineering Design
Environmental Engineering Design CVEN 4434
Popular in Course
Popular in Civil Engineering
This 11 page Class Notes was uploaded by Lina Vandervort on Thursday October 29, 2015. The Class Notes belongs to CVEN 4434 at University of Colorado at Boulder taught by Staff in Fall. Since its upload, it has received 16 views. For similar materials see /class/231888/cven-4434-university-of-colorado-at-boulder in Civil Engineering at University of Colorado at Boulder.
Reviews for Environmental Engineering Design
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!
Date Created: 10/29/15
San Pablo Water Management Team David DiGiacomo Chris Fahlin Brian Marsh Background Future conditions Criteria and Constraints Range of Options Assessment Selection Outline Preliminary Design 7 Implementation Strategies Acknowledgements Questions Trivia Introduction Potable Water for San Pablo Assessment Preliminary Design Outline BaCk grQund Location Current Situation Water Source Water Quality Current Situation i Cistem 2600 Gallon Pump Centrifugal Pump Gas powered Water SQurce 7 Swasey River 7 Perennial River 7 Fluctuating Flow Ruled out 7 Groundwater 7 Rainwater catchments Future Conditions Procurement Graph Projected Domestic Water Demand Treatment Goals aiianmv Hwy Treatme ntGoals 1 Reduce incidence of cholera and other causes of diarrhea and dehydration reduce overall public health risk of current drinking water 2 Provide a system that can be managed and owned successfully by the people of San Pablo L 3Maintain taste color and texture of drinking water in its present form in San Pablo to the best of our ability I 4 Do not compromise the culture of San Pablo and the 39 history of its people I 5 Minimize economic costs and impacts on the village Waterquot Quality Tested by Jon Stoddard Sept 2001 Fecal Contamination 7 High levels 7 Exceeds Drinking water standards 7 Exceeds Wastewater Ef uent standards Unknowns 7 TOC ALK pH Temp Turbidity etc Projected Domestic Water Demaan 2001 2006 Populatlon 250 3 1 9 Do me stic Wate r pe r Village r GPD Total Do me stic GPD Criteria ahd Qonstraints Sustainability 39 Performance 7 Economic 7 Pathogen Removal 7 Environmental 7 Design Life 7 Social 7 Operation 7 Disaster 7 Pesticide Removal Weighted Score Design Matrix Ranged bfoptions Assessment I Settling Disinf c on Centralized Chlorine D1s1nfection Ozone Slow Sand Filtration Filtration W 7 Centralized Standard and D6612de 7 UV Pasteurization 7 Pulsebed m 7 Sedimentation Basis 7 Home 7 Multimedia AtHome Chlorinex Ceramic Filtration lined with Bateriostatic 7 Declining rate m 7 Flltl l l 7 Bank ltration 7 Membrane processes Centrallzerd9h39 r39ne Slow Sand Filtration DlsmfectIQn Pros Consii Centralized 39 Homeii J 7 Pros 7 Fr superlor Pathogen 7 Rel ecnon Change a Local Materials OS Removal 1n Taste a Gravity driven a Quallty of treated Ownership I 7 HandlingEducation water 7 neXpenswe a No change in taste concerns 0 Ease of operatlon or Odor 7 Relativel Sim le Gravity Driven y p 7 Susceptlble to No change in taste 7 Cons I 7 Res1dual Downtime and or Odor Cannot meet dally demand L 7 Eas to Monitor Damage 7 Cons y DBP Unfamiliar Dependant on 7 S Responsibility 1nd1v1dual usage 0 Initial Capital Nonlocal materials Fil tr n Pros Design Matrixi by Train Cons Li 7 Simple r No SSF SSF Chlorin Filtrt m SSF SSF SSF 7 Inter 9 Central Central ven on V 31 Gem amp amp 7 Somally Acceptable 7 Market r tral Chlorine Filtrbn amp 1 Filtrun 7 Low Cost 7 CS solutlon Home 7MicrO6nterprise Scores 751 587 572 778 623 7 Many backups 7 No electricity dependence 7 Performance Recommendation Preliminary Design SSF Centralized SSF in combination with Home Scope Filtr n Slzmg Materials amp Quantities Cost Estimates Together can meet demand No residual Backup Increase performance Proposed Schematics Increase design life for Filtron g Basis for Design Design Manuals Less Cleaning time for Filtron Schematic 1 Slz1ng mm mm mm Filter media sand 39 39 Cost Materials and Quantities Concrete 52 cu yd 162cu yd 5i Sand 11 cu Yd 169cu Yd 39 z z 2 L W UWEWMN 7 r PVC Plumblng 600 239 Total Cost 11000 Recommended Implementation Strategy SSF Recommended Implementation Strategy Filtr n N i aaaa a Na cm Onstte lnvesttgatton Villager Training Operation Strategy Filtro n Cost Immediate relief 1000 Workshop Establishment 15000 20000 all inclusive AcknoWIedgements Dr Angela Bielefeldt Dr J oy Barrett EWBDr Amadei Water For People UROP Alexandra Gabrieloff PFP Daniele Lantagne MIT Lecturer and Alethia Environmental Richard Kraiser photos Statement 0fthe Problem 4 Design a system to treat pig waste for use as fertilizer for organic cacao crops Government funded Limited technology Treatment system smaller than others built Wanda 339le Soil and Pig Waste 7 H jagpfxico ma W Characteristics 1 33 I aggro I 4 lOto 25 Pigs Expected a RamforestSorlis its 4 Waste is 10 Solids DeVOld 0f Virtually CzNszK All Nutrients V a 7 laquot 73110383053 4 Cacao grown IS Produce 4 to 13 orgamc pounds of Waste per Day h L H T mi 1992MADELLANG s n u L Jquot rill 5 Cacao Future Conditions at Current design for 1 organic cacao farmer 10 total farmers in Mayapan MarJune 3 are successful at organic cacao farming v a Ripe Pod Contains Elbow 40 seeds oz Total crop area not expected to increase quot quot e Seeds are Dried and Fermented to Cocoa Beans Product Goals 7 lt Product Goals N P K meal 39 4 57 4 Pathogen Destructlon Nutrients Main route of destruction through elevated for Cacao temperature Trees Raw Solid 66 25 35 Other physlcal and chem1cal disinfectants Pig Waste not feasible because of energy money or Nutrients other reasons Standard 30 E 10 10 Store Bought Fertilizer i Usmg Bacrerla to Make Constraints and Criteria Fertlllzer 4r Noncost Criteria 50 6 Expandab ity Ofthe ozo Good bacteria that treat waste are 139 gt gn fgj ina w treatmentunit 5 a 77 7 Positive byproducts such not the same as bad pathogenlc 2 Longtem effectiveness as biogas 3 bacteria reliability 9 s Odor 2 Protection of human health and environment 14 ozo Types of Bacteria Aerobic 7 4 Cost Criteria 50 Anaerobic 4 Community acceptability 139 capltai COSt 30 Methanogens 7 2 Operatlon and mam enance over 5 Mamtenance effort 7 lifetime 20 Anaerobic Digestion 39 7 Recove Alternatives oz Anaerobic Digestion Reactor 1 Reactor 2 4 AnaerobicAerobic Digestion Homogenization 39 Anaerobic Digester ozo Composting 391 oz Anaerobic Batch Reactor Reactor 3 Fertilizer Anaerobic Di gester Anaerobic Digestion 391 quot ozo Decision Matrix Score 329 ozo Total Capital Cost 2310 AnaerobicAerobic Digestion AnaerobicAerobic Digestion ozo Decision Matrix Score 335 4 Total Capital Cost 2780 Anaerobic Anaerobic 39 Digester Digester I Fertilizer Reactor 3 Mixed Aerobic 39 A Digester I Composting oz Periodically turned to provide oxygen oz Composting pit maintained at 5060 water content ozo Covered during rainy season Composting ozo Decision Matrix Score 403 oz Total Capital Cost 80 Anaerobic Batch Reactors ozo Multiple Reactors ozo After one reactor is full close and begin filling the next reactor in the series ozo Easily expanded upon Final Design Anaerobic Batch Reactors 239 PVC Mlxer oz Decision Matrix Score 426 ozo Total Capital Cost 1512 nnnn 52 on Ammonia Concentration Concerns 4 Ammonia at high concentrations 30003500 mgl is toxic Mixing to methanogons 4 Water Dilution will keep ammonia concentrations acceptable m up Ammonia Level in raw Swine 4200 mgl 7 Waste 4 PVC FIFE Ammonia Created by Biomass 1602 2106 mgl Total Ammonia Load in Reactor 5802 6306 mgl Water Dilution Factor 1 F inaZ Product Biogas Recovery oz Mostly Liquid 16 solids which is a solid reduction of 69 a Methane and carbon dioxide the main compounds in biogas are greenhouse gases so biogas collection is important oz System not pH sensitive 0 CNPK 69 10 038 053 6 Use of gas bag is the simplest solution Uses of Biogas 9 Cooking on Biogas Stove 9 Run a Bio gas fueled generator to create electricity Final Capital Cost Materials Total Cost 2quot PVC Pipe 788 4quot PVC Pipe 122 Pipe fittings caps etc 12600 1250 L 330 Gallon Tank 252000 ShovelScoop 2000 Heavyduty Wheelbarrow 5000 Methane Recovery System 50000 Total 3225 Vampire Bat Problems 9 Vampire bats in Mayapan often bite the pigs 9 The pigpen needs to have a physical barrier from the bats 3 Total Cost 270 Operational and Startup Information 3 The system startup should be seeded with cow manure 9 20 of the biomass should be left behind after each cycle 1 I 0 quot v a The system should be mixed at least twice a1 j39 if day for ten minutes 39 st The waste will need to be diluted by an equa amount of water Schedule 9 25 Days for Construction 9 2 months to fine tune residence times percentage of recycle and dilution factor Additional Considerations smallest system we found in research had a 10000 liter reactor Q o o In a co op system the benefits would be much greater as electricity production could be I 2 The system would be experimental as the a considered 3 G l o 99 For a coop system much larger reactors built of concrete would need to be designed however design principals previously discussed would still be valid 039 SML Engineering Inc Questions 7
Are you sure you want to buy this material for
You're already Subscribed!
Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'