Results | MatthewGruter

RESULTS

Result 1: Reduced WWTP Complexity

If a urine separation level of 80% and above could be achieved, the need for nitrification could be eliminated, thus eliminating the need for the need for a complex 3 reactor system (shown below left). Instead, a simple 2 reactor system system could be used (shown below right), allowing easier and cheaper construction and operation. (click images below to enlarge)

Complex 3 Reactor System

Simple 2 Reactor System

OPTIMISED WWTP

UNOPTIMISED WWTP

Result 2: Increased WWTP Capacity

Urine separation allows gains in capacity due to a decrease in nutrient loading on the biological reactors. Nutrient removal is the prime bottleneck at WWTPs, so reducing the influent nutrient load increases the capacity. For an optimised WWTP, the capacity (serviceable population) could be increased to 240% of the original (below right), while for an unoptimised setup only 123% increased capacity was observed (below left). (click images below to enlarge)

Unoptimised Capacity

Optimised Capacity

OPTIMISED WWTP

UNOPTIMISED WWTP

Result 3: Improved Effluent Quality

OPTIMISED WWTP

UNOPTIMISED WWTP

OPTIMISED WWTP

UNOPTIMISED WWTP

OPTIMISED WWTP

UNOPTIMISED WWTP

Effluent Ammonia:

Effluent Nitrate:

Effluent Phosphorous:

As expected, increasing the level of urine separation had a drastic effect on the effluent quality. For both the unoptimised and optimised WWTPs, direct effluent quality improvements were found with increasing urine separation. As expected, the improvements in effluent quality were greater when the plant was unoptimised (left unchanged), but this came as a trade-off against lower gains in capacity. In the optimised setup, the peak effluent Ammonia and Phosphorous concentrations were much higher than in the unoptimised setup. This was expected because the WWTP setup was configured to be 'on the edge' with respect to nutrient removal. (click images below to enlarge)