Treatment Technologies for Ammonia in Liquid Manure: Nitrification/denitrification and Anammox Based...

Preview:

DESCRIPTION

Proceedings available at: http://www.extension.org/67627 Biological nitrogen removal is regarded as the most efficient and economically feasible method available for removal of ammonia from wastewater. Its implementation in concentrated livestock farms can help reduce surplus nitrogen and ammonia emissions.

Citation preview

Treatment Technologies for Ammonia in Liquid Manure: Nitrification/denitrification and Anammox Based

Deammonification

From Waste to Worth ConferenceDenver, Colorado, April 4, 2013

Matias Vanotti, Patrick Hunt, Ariel Szogi - USDA-ARS, Florence, SC, USAJose Martinez - IRSTEA, Rennes Centre, France

Airton Kunz - EMBRAPA Swine and Poultry, Concordia, Brazil Takao Fujii - Sojo University, Kumamoto, Japan Kenji Furukawa - Kumamoto University, Japan

North Carolina producesapproximately 750 million chickens, 40 million turkeys, 3.5 billion table eggs, and 19 million hogs per year.

Animal Manure – Surplus N and Ammonia Emissions in many regions of USA (and the world)

Walker et al., Atmos. Environ. 38:1235-1246

Ammonia Emissions

Treatment Technologies for Nitrogen Management in Liquid Manure

• Biological nitrogen removal (conversion of ammonia into N2)

1. Nitrification-Denitrification

• 2nd Generation system (lagoon replacement)• Full-scale treatment of 5,200 finishing pigs in North Carolina• Solid-liquid separation with polymer, then nitrification/denitrification

to remove the ammonia, and P recovery.

Bioresource Technology 100 (2009): 5406-5416

Solids

N

P

Biological nitrogen removal: Nitrification-Denitrification

NITRIFICATIONDENITRIFICATION

NH4+

NO2-

NO3-

N2

NOx

Organic-C

Organic-C

Organic-C

O2

O2

TREATEDEFFLUENT

PHOSPHORUS SEPARATION UNIT

BBLOWER

POLYMERFLOCCULANT

P

DENITRIFICATION

CLARIFICATION

NITRIFICATION

RETURNBIOLOGICAL SLUDGE

CONFINEDLIVESTOCK

SOLID-LIQUID SEPARATION UNIT

EXCESSBIOLOGICAL SLUDGE

RECYCLE

PHOSPHATE PRECIPITATE SLUDGE

P

M

HOMOGENIZATIONTANK LIME

DEWATERED SOLIDS,BIOLOGICAL SLUDGE & PHOSPHORUS SLUDGE

P

M

PREANOXIC BIOLOGICAL NITROGEN REMOVAL UNIT

Modified Ludzack-Ettinger (MLE)

P

SEPARATEDLIQUIDTANK

Denitrification

Nitrification

Denitrificationuses soluble carbonfrom manure

• 3rd Generation system (2012)• Full-scale treatment of 1,200-sow farrow-to-finish (producing 30,500

hogs/year) in North Carolina• Solid-liquid separation using settling and polymer, then

nitrification/denitrification to remove the ammonia

Terra Blue Inc., Clinton, NC

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Feb Ma

Ap

rM

aJu

nJu

lA

ug

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

Jan

Feb

Wat

er T

emp

erat

ure

(o C

)Daily MAX

Daily MIN

Average

To reduce cost, the 2nd generation system incorporated new nitrifying bacteria sludge acclimated to low temperatures

0 5 10 15 20 25 300

500

1000

1500

2000

0

10

20

30

40

50HPNS; this invention

Marine; Furukawa et al.(1993)

On-site domestic, Chiemchaisriand Yamamoto (1993)

Municipal; Chudoba andPannier, (1994)

Enriched nitrifying for high-ammoniadigester; Shammas, (1986)

Livestock; Bae et al. (2001)

Municipal; Wild et al. (1971)

Nit

rifi

cati

on

Rat

eg

N/m

3 -rea

cto

r/d

Cold weather municipal; Anderssonand Rosen (1990)

y = 1.25 + 1.93xr2 = 0.998

Temperature, oC

mg

N /g

ML

VS

S /h

High Performance Nitrifying Sludge(HPNS): • Isolated from manure • High activity at low temperatures• Used for rapid start-up of plants

HPNS was deposited in Agriculture Research Culture Collection (Peoria, IL ) : NRRL B-50289

To start-up the plant, the nitrification tank (230 m3) was seeded with 1 liter of HPNS. In 40 days, it reached the optimum removal rate of 100 kg ammonia-N/day

Operation Simplicity Once a week, the operator measured the nitrifying biomass

and set the operation parameters for the week.

MLE Biological N Removal performanceInfluent

Conc. (After Solids Separation) (ppm)

EffluentConc. (ppm)

Efficiency%

TKN 1,428 ± 597 101 ± 145 92.9

NH4-N 1,182 ± 483 59 ± 124 95.0

COD 8,906 ± 4,933 1,016 ± 529 88.6

NH4-N removal efficiency: Warm Weather: 94.0% Cold Weather: 96.0%

Ammonia emissions reduction with this system compared to the anaerobic lagoon technology

Aneja et al., 2008. Atmospheric Environment, 42:3291-3300

Emissions reduction

Warm Season 94.7%

Cool Season 99.0%

TSS

N

P

Lagoon System

New System

The use of clean water to flush barns improved the air quality in the barns, pig health and economic returns

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

May

Jun

Jul

Au

g

Sep

NH

3 C

on

cen

trat

ion

in

Bar

n E

xhau

st A

ir (

pp

m)

Lagoon SystemNew SystemAvg Lagoon Sytem Avg New System

NH3 in the barns

Benefits of cleaner environment on animal production

** Data compares five pig production cycles obtained with lagoon technology and five pig cycles obtained with the new technology (5200 pigs/cycle)

Treatment Technologies for Biological Nitrogen Removal in Liquid Manure

1. Nitrification-Denitrification

2. Partial Nitritation-Anammox

(Deammonification)Anammox

Deammonification ProcessTraditional Nitrogen Removal Processes

Uses external carbon addition for DN

( nitrification / denitrification )

NH4+

Anammox

NO2-

N2↑

Biological N removal processesBiological N removal processes

nitrification

denitrification nitrification

denitrification

MeOH

4 Q

( partial nitritation / anammox)

Uses endogenous carbon for DN No carbon needed

Anammox: new shortcut for the biological removal of nitrogen

NITRIFICATIONDENITRIFICATION

NH4+

NO2-

NO3-

N2

NOx

Organic-C

ANAMMOX

Organic-C

Organic-C

O2

O2

Anammox bacteria for low-cost treatment of livestock wastewater

• Isolated from swine manure

in North Carolina

Brocadia caroliniensis

Anammox = Anaerobic ammonium oxidation

• ~ Half the aeration cost than

traditional method

Anammox biomass was grown in a parent reactor in Florence, South Carolina.

Brocadia caroliniensis was deposited in USDA Agriculture Research Culture Collection (Peoria, IL): NRRL B-50286

Partial nitritation + Anaerobic Ammonia Oxidation (ANAMMOX)

Partial Nitritation ANAMMOX

aeration

NH4+ + NO2

-

50 %

NH4+ in

-

N2

Treated effluent

Closed Anaerobic

Environment

• Two sequencing batch tractors (SBR)

• Treatment of swine wastewater (1400 mg N/L)

Anammox coupled with Partial Nitritation

Two-stage process:

Anammox SBR

Magrí, A.; Vanotti, M.B.; Szögi, A.A.; Cantrell, K.B. Partial nitritation of swine wastewater in view of its coupling with the anammox process. Journal of Environmental Quality (2012 doi:10.2135/jeq2012.0092)

Partial nitritation SBR

2010: anammox bacteria handled under anaerobic conditions

Completely anaerobic Chambers??

2011: Single tank deammonification process (nitritation-anammox)

Biofilm plastic carriers

Mixing of specialized bacterial cultures to start the one-stage process

Continuous flow, aerated reactor

Single-tank deammonification process start-up: 1. Mix of nitrification sludge with anammox,

2. start aeration and wastewater flow

Nitrification sludge HPNS

Anammox sludge B. Caroliniensisin the single-tank

Continuous flow, aerated fluidized reactor with biofilm carriers 30% v/v

Single-tank deammonification reactor setup (5-L reactor)

Another Single-tank deammonification reactor setup ( 1-L)

Air flowmeter and valve

Return Sludge

Single tank

Clarifier

DO monitor

pHmonitor

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 250

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

NH4-NinNH4-NoutNO2-NinNO2-NoutNO3-NinNO3-Nout

days

N C

once

ntra

tion

(mg/

L)

I II III

I = synthetic effluent (~360 mg NH4-/L), II = swine effluent ~340 mg NH4/L), III = swine effluent ~600 mg NH4-N/L).

Nitrogen Removal in Single Reactor

Single tank deammonification of swine wastewater

Stoichiometry obtained:1 NH4 + 0.87 O2 0.45 N2 + 0.11 NO3 + 1.41 H2O + 1.18 H+

Deammonification of swine wastewater

Parameter SW

Ammonia removal rate1034 mg N/L-

reactor/day

Ammonia removal efficiency 100%Total N removal efficiency 89.1%

Single tank deammonification process

Theory (partial nitritation + anammox):

NH4+ + 0.85 O2 → 0.44 N2 + 0.11 NO3

- + 1.41 H2O + 1.19 H+

Stoichiometric rates

NH4+ + 0.87 O2 → 0.45 N2 + 0.11 NO3

- + 1.41 H2O + 1.18 H+

Theoretical

Results of this study using digested swine manure

Deammonification reaction reduced 57% of the oxygen requirements and 100% of the carbon needs. (Compared to nitrification-denitrification, from 2.0 to 0.85 mol O2 / mol NH4)

NH4+ + 0.85 O2 → 0.44 N2 + 0.11 NOx

- + 1.41 H2O + 1.19 H+

Reactor 1 (5-L)

Reactor 2 (1-L)

New Deammonification Process for Manure Digester Effluents

Deammonification Treatment (compared to nitrification-denitrification)

• It is quick and efficient (high removal rate = 1 kg NH4-N/m3/day)

• Organic carbon is not needed (best option for anaerobic digestion effluents)• Aeration needs reduced by 57% (lower operational costs)

Conclusions

• Nitrification-denitrification of swine wastewater was optimized after solids-liquid separation using a pre-anoxic design and a high performance nitrification sludge (HPNS)

• Single-tank deammonification with anammox was feasible. It may be a key technology for efficient ammonia treatment in systems that consume carbon for energy production (AD)

http://www.ars.usda.gov/saa/cpswprc

Odor reduction in the liquid (99.9%)

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

pp

b

Sample

Skatole

Homogenization Tank

Separated Water

Post Nitrogen Treatment

Post Phosphorus Treatment

Biological N treatment

Loughrin et al., JEQ 38:1739-1748

GHG Emissions reduced 97% with the replacement of the anaerobic lagoon with

the aerobic system

4430

542

18135

0500

100015002000250030003500400045005000

Ton

CO

2-eq

/yea

r

Baseline (lagoon) EST Project Activity

CH4 N2O

Vanotti et al., Waste Management 28:759-766

Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emission reduction using aerobic treatment (nitrification/denitrification and composting)

Vanotti et al., Waste Management 28:759-766

Baseline (lagoon)

Project Activity

De

cJ

an

Fe

bM

ar

Ap

rM

ay

Ju

nJ

ul

Au

gS

ep

Oc

tN

ov

De

cJ

an

Fe

b

0

300

600

900

1200

0

20

40

60

80

100

NitrogenPig Weight

To

tal P

ig W

eig

ht

(lb

* 10

00)

Flu

sh N

Lo

ad (kg

/d)

New systems need to be robust and withstand the large load changes during production (data show three production cycles)

Single-tank operation• Continuous flow• HRT 0.4-0.8 days• Return sludge 2Q• Ambient temperature (22 oC)• Aeration rate 60 mL/min (DO 0.5-

0.9 mg/L)• Plastic media 40% v/v• Reactor MLVSS ~2600 mg/L• Influent ammonia 365 to 600 mg

N/L• Carbonate alkalinity 1700 to 3000

mg/L

• Start-up with synthetic wastewater (10 days), then switch to swine wastewater (Effluent of anaerobic digestion)

Brocadia sp. (Candidatus AM285341)

Uncultured planctomycete Pla 5GA-8 (GQ356125)

Uncultured bacterium Asahi BRW (AB456583)

Brocadia caroliniensisCandidatus Brocadia fulgida (Candidatus EU478693)

Uncultured planctomycete HAuD-MB/2-35 (AB176696)

Brocadia anammoxidans (Candidatus AF375994)

Uncultured anoxic sludge bacterium KU1 (AB054006)

Anammoxoglobus propionicus (Candidatus DQ317601)

Jettenia asiatica (Candidatus DQ301513)

Uncultured planctomycete KSU-1 (AB057453)

Kuenenia stuttgartiensis (Candidatus AF375995)

Scalindua sorokinii (Candidatus AY257181)

100

100

100

8999

87

96

97

100

81

0.005

Similarity to Candidatus “B. caroliniensis” (JF487828)

Candidatus “Brocadia fulgida” 96%

Candidatus “Brocadia anammoxidans” 94%

Candidatus “Jettenia asiatica” 92%

Candidatus “Kuenia stuttgartiensis” 90%

Candidatus “Anammoxoglobus propionicus” 90%

Candidatus “Scalindua sorokinii” 86%

Single-tank reactor N removal at various N concentrations and loads

0102030405060708090100

0200400600800

100012001400160018002000

0 100 200 300 400 500

Rem

oval

effi

cien

cy (%

)

NH

4lo

ad o

r rem

oval

rate

(mg

N/L

-re

acto

r/d)

Influent NH4+ concentration (mg N/L)

NH4 load (mg N /L/d) NH4 removal (mg N/L/d) % Efficiency

Recommended