1 / 51

Use of Ultrafiltration for Mercury Removal CMS Land Company Little Traverse Bay Environmental Project (LTBEP) (Bay Harbo

Use of Ultrafiltration for Mercury Removal CMS Land Company Little Traverse Bay Environmental Project (LTBEP) (Bay Harbor Development, Petoskey, MI). 2011 MWEA Annual Conference Shanty Creek Resort, Bellaire MI June 28, 2011. Prepared by: Environmental Consulting & Technology, Inc.

marla
Download Presentation

Use of Ultrafiltration for Mercury Removal CMS Land Company Little Traverse Bay Environmental Project (LTBEP) (Bay Harbo

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Use of Ultrafiltration for Mercury RemovalCMS Land CompanyLittle Traverse Bay Environmental Project (LTBEP)(Bay Harbor Development, Petoskey, MI) 2011 MWEA Annual ConferenceShanty Creek Resort, Bellaire MIJune 28, 2011 Prepared by: Environmental Consulting & Technology, Inc. • Environmental Consulting & Technology, Inc. • 2200 Commonwealth Blvd., Ste. 300 • Ann Arbor, MI 48105 Traverse City, MI 49684 • Ph: (734) 769-3004 Ph: (231) 946-8200 • Fax (734) 769-3164 Fax: (231) 946-8208 • Peter F. Hill, P.E. • Jeremy S. Lewandowski • Mark D. Mikesell, Ph.D. • William E. Stone

  2. SUMMARY OF LITTLE TRAVERSE BAYENVIRONMENTAL PROJECT (LTBEP)GOALS & RESULTS • Characterize Cement Kiln Dust (CKD) Leachate for Hg, TSS & other parameters. • Determine effectiveness of Ultrafiltration (UF) Technology to Treat CKD Leachate. • Characterize Effluent from UF to Determine Compatibility with WQS. • Demonstrate CKD Leachate can be Treated & Discharged to Little Traverse Bay (LTB). • Assist CMS Land Co. (CMSL) in obtaining Permits/Authorizations to discharge Leachate. • UF achieved 97% Hg Removal (1.8 ng/L achieved). • MDEQ considers UF as Best Available Technology (BAT) for this site. 2

  3. BAY HARBOR – SITE LOCATION Little Traverse Bay (Lake Michigan) • CMSL Bay Harbor Site located 5 miles west of Petoskey • Located on south shore ofLittle Traverse Bay, Lake Michigan. Emmet County 3 • Photo Source: Google Earth.

  4. HISTORICAL USE OF SITE • CEMENT-MANUFACTURING TIMELINE: • 1917 - Petoskey Portland Cement Co. formed. • 1954 – Penn-Dixie Cement Co. purchased land. • 1980 – Cement-Making Operations end - Penn-Dixie files for bankruptcy. • Photo Source: http://www.flickriver.com/photos/odalaigh/1532444089/ • Source: Tip of the Mitt Watershed Council, www.watershedcouncil.org. 4

  5. CEMENT MAKING PROCESS & CKD • Leftover material from grinding /heating limestone + other raw materials is CKD. • Leachate formed when water contacts CKD…caustic & contains heavy metals (mercury, arsenic, & lead). • Estimated 2.5 Million CY of CKD waste left behind. • Source: Tip of the Mitt Watershed Council, www.watershedcouncil.org. • Photo Source: Friends of the Jordan, Concerning the Bay Harbor Cercla Site, Presentation by Edward E. Timm, Ph.D., P.E. 5

  6. BAY HARBOR – RE-DEVELOPMENT OF SITE • 1993 – Bay Harbor Resort Properties Ltd. • & CMSL team to develop site. • Photo Source: Friends of the Jordan, Concerning the Bay Harbor Cercla Site, Presentation by Edward E. Timm, Ph.D., P.E. 6

  7. Oct. 1988 – Caustic groundwater found leaching into LTB. 1989 – East & West CKD areas show detectable concentrations of arsenic, chromium, copper, lead, nickel, selenium and zinc. ISSUES WITH SITE • Source: Tip of the Mitt Watershed Council, www.watershedcouncil.org. • Photo Source: Friends of the Jordan, Concerning the Bay Harbor Cercla Site, Presentation by Edward E. Timm, Ph.D., P.E. 7

  8. ISSUES WITH SITE (CONT’D) • 1994 – CKD piles contoured, covered with topsoil & turned into golf course. • 1997 – Leachate still reaching LTB @ Seep 2… • Seepage collection line installed. • Collected Leachate transported to Petoskey’s WWTP. • 2003 – CMSL constructed Pre-Treatment Facility to ↓ pH of Leachate & built discharge to Petoskey’s sanitary sewer. • Source: Tip of the Mitt Watershed Council, www.watershedcouncil.org. • Photo Source: Friends of the Jordan, Concerning the Bay Harbor Cercla Site, Presentation by Edward E. Timm, Ph.D., P.E. 8

  9. ISSUES WITH SITE (CONT’D) • Petoskey WWTP complications… • Leachate drained directly to LTB for several months. • Sept. 2004 – HIGH pH readings in LTB lead to Public Health Advisory from • NW Michigan Health Dept. & restricted access for > 1 mile of BH shoreline. • CMSL accepts environmental liability due to prior agreements. • Feb. 2005 – Admin. Order of Consent issued by EPA… • CMSL to take immediate remedial action & ultimately • “remove, isolate or contain” the CKD. • Source: Tip of the Mitt Watershed Council, www.watershedcouncil.org. 9

  10. REMEDIATION EFFORTS: COLLECT & TREAT BAY HARBOR DEVELOPMENT PRE-TREATMENT FACILITY • Short-Term Response: Collect & Pre-Treat • 1. System of collection drains/trenches: 2. Pump to Pre-Treatment • Seep 1 Facility (↓ pH) • Seep 2W (Seep 2 + West CKD) • Edge Drain • Total Leachate Collection System (TLC) • Ongoing Efforts: • Plan for extensive testing of hydrology/geology. • Up-gradient groundwater interceptor wells. • Photo Source: Google Earth. 10

  11. Lake Michigan (Little Traverse Bay) COLLECTION DRAIN LOCATIONS • Map Source: Barr Environmental 11

  12. LEACHATE INTERCEPT SYSTEM • Photo Source: Friends of the Jordan, Concerning the Bay Harbor Cercla Site, Presentation by Edward E. Timm, Ph.D., P.E. 12

  13. BAY HARBOR DEVELOPMENT PRE-TREATMENT FACILITY 13

  14. BAY HARBOR DEVELOPMENT PRE-TREATMENT FACILITY (CONT’D) • Automated Acid Injection System • Loading/ • Transport System • Frac Tanks to Store Pre-Treated Leachate) 14

  15. pH-neutralize ~ 150,000 gpd w/ concentrated H2SO4. Storage in Frac Tanks. Treated leachate transported to deep well injection facility near Gaylord, MI. Leachate previously transported to GT Co. Septage Treatment System (discharges to TC WWTP). Period when leachate transported to Petoskey’s WWTP. BAY HARBOR DEVELOPMENT PRE-TREATMENT FACILITY (CONT’D) 15

  16. Dark brown in color Caustic (pH >12) TDS = 2,700 to 21,000 mg/L TSS = Non-Detect to 17 mg/L Mercury = 15 to 544 ng/L Copper = 19 to 84 µg/L Vanadium = 42 to 130 µg/L High COD & TOC Low BOD BAY HARBOR – LEACHATE • Brown color, TOC & COD due to dissolved organic acids…fulvic, humic, tannic, etc. • CKD originally placed in cedar swamp. • pH, TDS & metals due to groundwater flow through CKD piles. 16

  17. BAY HARBOR – LEACHATE (CONT’D) • COSTLY $$ !! • Trucks run 24/7/365 disposal to deep well injection. • Public opposition to both deep well injection & constant trucking. • CMSL begins to explore other options!! 17

  18. PREVIOUS/ON-GOING STUDIES • CMSL has done extensive research on Hg treatment & disposal tech., including: • On-site deep well injection; • Discharge into municipal sanitary sewer (City of Petoskey); • Creation of interceptor trenches, collection and hauling of waste to off-site deep well (Current Operation); • On-site collection and treatment with point source discharge to Little Traverse Bay; • Adsorption Technology • Ultrafiltration Technology • Ultrafiltration is seen as the most promising Best Available Technology (BAT). 18

  19. PREVIOUS STUDIES • U.S. EPA • Aug. 2007 - Treatment Technologies for Hg in Soil, Waste and Water, U.S. EPA Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation, Washington D.C. • PARSONS GROUP • 2005 - Pilot scale study conducted over a 6-week period (Nov. to Dec.). • Demonstrated that Pretreatment (pH adjustment ) + UF could reduce Hg from 700 ng/L to 200 ng/L. • Hg reduced further to 20-30 ng/L when Coag./Precip. added. 19

  20. ON-GOING STUDIES • CAPTUR TECHNOLOGY • On-going evaluation of proprietary system using coag./floc. and adsorption technology to remove Hg. • Promising effluent Hg concentrations < 1.3 ng/L (WQS). • If technology is effective & efficient @ full-scale, • Captur technology will likely be used at Bay Harbor. 20

  21. Low pressure (5 psig to 150 psig) process . Uses semi-permeable tubular membrane. Removes high MW components/suspended solids from aqueous solutions. Low MW components pass through UF membranes. Membranes are physical barrier that permits passage of materials up to a certain size/shape/character. SUMMARY OF UF TECHNOLOGY 21

  22. Nov. 2009 - ECT begins UF pilot treatment study. Changes in volume/quality of Leachate since Parsons study. New waste stream – TLC. Used technology & operating conditions determined as optimal by Parsons study: pH-adjustment using 98% H2SO4 Coag.-Floc. w/ Aluminum sulfate (alum) Cationic polymer floc. aid (metal precipitant) UF Provided additional data for National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit Application. Koch Membrane Systems (KMS) provided UF Pilot System & Operational/Technical assistance. SUMMARY OF ECT PILOT STUDY 22

  23. INFLUENT COLLECTION • 4 Influent Streams • Edge Drain • TLC • Seep 1 • Seep 2W (Seep 2 + WCKD) 23

  24. “COMBINED” INFLUENT • Batches combined based on daily avg. flow of each stream. 24

  25. INFLUENT METERING/MIXING • 55-GAL. • head tanks 25

  26. pH-ADJUSTMENT • ↓ From >12 to 7.5 - 8.5 • 98% H2SO4 • 300-GAL.tank 26

  27. COAGULATION/FLOCCULATION • MP • Addition • Alum • Addition 27

  28. ULTRAFILTRATION 28

  29. ULTRAFILTRATION (CONT’D) • Process • Tank • (50 GAL.) • Feed/Supply • Tank (280 GAL.) 29

  30. STORAGE OF EFFLUENT/CONCENTRATE • 2 x 1,500-GAL. polytanks 30

  31. PILOT TREATMENT – FLOOR PLAN 31

  32. SUMMARY OF UF TECHNOLOGY • Koch Membrane Systems (KMS) provided UF Pilot System & Operational/Technical Assistance. • Photo Source: Koch Membrane Systems 32

  33. SUMMARY OF UF TECHNOLOGY (CONT’D) • Photo Source: Koch Membrane Systems • Photo Source: Koch Membrane Systems • Photo Source: Koch Membrane Systems 33

  34. 34

  35. UF PERMEATE/CONCENTRATE UF CONCENTRATE • PERMEATE • (EFFLUENT) • LEACHATE/ • FEED WATER • (INFLUENT) • ` • Solutes ↑ than UF membrane pore size • Suspended solids • Circled back to feed tank • Needs disposal • Combined Influent • Water, salts, ↓MW constituents • To Discharge 35

  36. UF FLOW – SIMPLE BATCH PROCESS • Figure Source: Koch Membrane Systems 36

  37. UF FLOW – MODIFIED BATCH PROCESS • Figure Source: Koch Membrane Systems 37

  38. UF FLOW – ONE-STAGE CONTINUOUS PROCESS • Figure Source: Koch Membrane Systems 38

  39. SUMMARY OF PILOT RUNS • Runs 1 -3: • Used Combined Influent (based on daily avg. flow of each seep). • Purpose: Demonstrated effectiveness to MDEQ, EPA & Stakeholders. 39

  40. SUMMARY OF PILOT RUNS (CONT’D) • Runs 4 - 14: • Determined optimum mix of seeps. • Collect WQ & System Operation Data to support full-scale commercial treatment system design. • Used individual seeps, various combinations, various additives, various concentration factors, longer run-times, etc. 40

  41. SUMMARY OF PILOT RUNS (CONT’D) 41

  42. Analysis included: COD TDS* TSS* TOC Alkalinity Hardness Anions (incl. Chloride* & Sulfate*) Various individual stream component concentrations… Heavy metals: Cu* , Hg*, Pb, Ni, Mo*, Se* & V* Sulfate salts Note: Asterisk (*) indicates “Constituent of Concern” Acute & Chronic Toxicity Data SUMMARY ANALYTICAL DATA 42

  43. ANALYTICAL RESULTS • 97% Hg Removed • (Influent 42 to 78 ng/L) (Effluent 1.8 to 8.1 ng/L) • 97% TSS Removed • (Influent 13 to 107 mg/L) (Effluent <3.3 to 8.5 mg/L) • 90% Cu Removed • (Influent 13 to 49 µg/L) (Effluent <5.0 to 14 µg/L) 43

  44. ANALYTICAL RESULTS • 32% Molybdenum Removed • (Influent 76 to 100 µg/L) (Effluent 53 to 140 µg/L) • 30% Selenium Removed • (Influent 16 to 23 µg/L) (Effluent 14 to 27 µg/L) • 28% TDS Removed • (Influent 4,700 to 7,200 mg/L) (Effluent 4,000 to 8,300 mg/L) • 24% Sulfate Removed • (Influent 1,700 to 2,900 mg/L) (Effluent 1,700 to 3,900 mg/L) • 23% Chloride Removed • (Influent 330 to 1,100 mg/L) (Effluent 310 to 1,200 mg/L) • Use of both Alum & Metal Precipitant provided best metals removal 44

  45. RESULTS – MERCURY REMOVAL • 97% Hg Removed 45

  46. RESULTS – TSS REMOVAL • 97% TSS Removed 46

  47. RESULTS – COPPER REMOVAL • 90% Copper Removed 47

  48. TCLP RESULTS • TOXICITY CHARACTERISTIC LEACHING PROCEDURE: • Effluent Does NOT exceed regulatory limits for hazardous waste. 48

  49. FULL-SCALE TREATMENT SYSTEM 49

  50. CONCLUSION • UF System Effective in Removing Hg: • 97% Hg Removal • 1.8 ng/L [Hg] achieved • MDEQ Considers UF To Be Best-Available-Technology In This Case • NPDES Permit Issued for Discharge to LTB • With Hg Limits • With WET Limits • New Treatment Building currently under construction. 50

More Related