STUMPing for the Environment City of Columbus Draft 2009 Solids Treatment and Utilization Master Plan

1. STUMPing for the EnvironmentCity of ColumbusDraft 2009 Solids Treatment and Utilization Master Plan Rob Van Evra Treatment Engineering City of Columbus DOSD 5 CITIES PLUS 2010 August 10, 2010

2. Solids Master Plan Considerations Stakeholder input and SWAB guidance Mayors Climate Protection Agreement Carbon footprint reduction Get Green Columbus Action Plan 2010 Energy efficiency Beneficial use/reuse/recycle Wet weather capacities Future nutrient limitations

3. WWTP Biosolids Breakdown Jackson Pike WWTP produces approximately 27 dry tons of WWTP biosolids each day Southerly WWTP produces approximately 65 dry tons of WWTP biosolids each day

4. Compost Facility Composts WWTP biosolids with yard waste and woodchips to create Com-Til, a fertilizer and soil amendment product available to the public and to landscapers Permitted to accept approximately 40 dry tons of biosolids per day Currently operates at approximately 30 dry tons of biosolids per day

5. Biosolids Processes Modeling Evaluate all biosolids alternatives using many years of collected WWTP and Compost Facility operational data Optimize entire WWTP/Compost process network based on specified parameters Costs Energy usage Greenhouse gas emissions

6. New Network

7. Modeling Biosolids w/ Eco-Flow Investigated a wide variety of scenarios for biosolids treatment and utilization using the Ohio State University Center for Resilience’s Eco-FlowTM model Extreme scenarios (e.g. only a single disposal option) Diverse scenarios Model-chosen pathways Include new process technologies Over 25 options at each plant

8. Quadruple Bottom Line Analyzed social, environmental, economic and technical ramifications of all options Performed on all Eco-FlowTM scenarios Best options included: Utilization by Third Parties Combinations of Land Application and Composting Poor options included: Incineration Elimination of Digestion

9. Risk Probability Analysis Capital Improvement Recommendations from the draft STUMP analyzed for risk cost probabilities and consequences of any future changes in: Regulatory requirements Commodity prices Environmental priorities Technological innovations Third-Party involvement Asset Management Program Finalization (2010)

10. Recommended Scenario JPWWTP: 70% land application, 30% compost, digestion, sell (or clean) biogas SWWTP: 50% land application, 50% compost, digestion, sell (or clean) biogas Compost Facility: add 3rd pad, on-site grinding, and future bridge construction Bottom Line – UTILIZATION IS THE KEY!

11. Recommended Plan With the recommendations selected, a plan was developed for implementation:

12. Recommended Plan Identify, Examine and Pursue Opportunities for Third-Party Purchases: Biogas Biosolids

13. Recommended Plan De-emphasize reliance on incineration Maintain air permits for the extended lifespans of the incinerators Make upgrades to incinerators to allow optimal operation 2014 for JPWWTP 2015 for SWWTP

14. Recommended Plan Landfilling Continue working with local landfills (2010) Maintain availability of this disposal option

15. Recommended Plan Utilization of Anaerobic Digester Biogas Raw biogas is currently used at both plants for boilers and as needed for incineration If possible, sell raw biogas to a third party or electric utility for their use (2010) Begin pilot tests of biogas cleaning systems at both plants to achieve pipeline quality (JPWWTP 2011, SWWTP 2012) Cleaned biogas can be sold to local gas utility Compressed Natural Gas Facilities (2017)

16. Recommended Plan Expansion of and Enhancement to Land Application Program Multiple Contractors Multiple Application Methods GIS-based Application/Data Collection Timing/Loading/Incorporation Coordination Increase Plant Storage and Remote Storage

17. Recommended Plan Land Application Program Expansion Refurbish land application tanks at JPWWTP (2012) Construct land application tanks at SWWTP (2013) Expand available fields for land application (2010)

18. Recommended Plan Centrate Phosphorus Recovery & Reuse Recommend a pilot test at SWWTP before full scale implementation (2010) Recommended for both treatment plants (2015) Fertilizer produced by the process could be a source of revenue Could decrease % ratio of phosphorus in land- applied biosolids and also reduce WWTP biosolids Possible reduction in the amount of chemical addition needed for nutrient removal as low nutrient limits for WWTP effluents are implemented in the future

19. Recommended Plan Compost Facility Improvements Part 1: Construct 3rd compost pad w/ biofilter to negatively aerate curing and add grinder to provide more fresh bulking agent (2011) Follow-up odor analysis to be conducted after Part 1 (2013) Part 2: Bridge between SWWTP and the Compost Facility (2016)

20. STUMP Team Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. Cosmo Bertino, PE Kathleen Smith, PE Dan Gernant, PE Eric Auerbach, PE Ribway Engineering Group – Debby Evans The Ohio State University Center for Resilience Dr. Joseph Fiksel Dr. Kieran Sikdar Dr. Emrah Cimren Dr. Mark Posner

21. Questions or Comments?Rob Van Evrarevanevra@columbus.gov(614) 645-79611250 Fairwood Avenue, Room 0020Columbus, Ohio 43206

22. Site Layouts

23. Compost Facility Site Layout

24. Compost Facility/SWWTP Bridge

25. Southerly WWTP

26. SWWTP Site Layout

27. Jackson Pike WWTP Bullets

28. JPWWTP Site Layout

29. Methodology

30. Grouping of Similar Eco-FlowTM O&M Cost, Energy, and GHG Outcomes

31. Selected Scenario from Each Grouping

32. Selected Scenarios with Best GHG Performance per Dollar

33. Selected Scenarios with Best GHG Performance per Dollar