Engineers' Society of Western Pennsylvania

Location

337 Fourth Avenue
Pittsburgh, PA 15222

Phone: (412) 261-0710 Email: eswp@eswp.com Get Directions

Monday, November 11

Technical Sessions – 1:15-5:00 PM

ASME-Sponsored Session: Communicating Lessons Learned from Operating Steam Generating Systems

IWC Rep: Debbie Bloom, Retired, Wheaton, IL
Session Chair: Wayne Bernahl, W. Bernahl Enterprises, Elmhurst, IL
Discussion Leader: George Patrick, SUEZ Water Technologies & Solutions, Trevose, PA

Industrial steam generating systems have been continuously in use since before any of us were born.  Yet, many problems still occur with the operation of steam generating systems which cause unscheduled outages and millions of dollars.  Many of these problems are all too common and well known to industry experts but uncommon and not known to those newer to steam system operations.  The purpose of this session is to communicate some of these problems to the audience in hopes that they can be avoided and not learned through experience.

Consider Attending: W1, W3, W7, W8, W10, W11, W15, W17, W18, W21

IWC 19-13: Mechanical and Operating Problems with Deaerators
Robert Bartholomew, P.E., Sheppard T. Powell Associates LLC, Baltimore, MD

The paper provides examples of mechanical and operating problems with deaerators contributing to high dissolved oxygen and/or deaerator damage. Examples of mechanical problems presented include water entrainment in deaerator vent, failed baffles, erosion and flow accelerated corrosion (FAC) of deaerator vessel, too loose spray nozzles, too tight spray nozzles, leaking inlet water chamber, and failed trays. Detection and correction of the problems requires routine deaerator inspections.

Discusser: Joshua Perich, Air Products & Chemicals, Inc., Allentown, PA

IWC 19-14: Steam Drum: A Crucial Factor in Ensuring Proper Boiler Chemistry
Colleen Scholl, P.E., HDR, Whitewater, WI

While the boiler steam drum is often seen as simply a storage vessel where water and steam separation occurs, it is a far more complex part of the overall steam/water cycle. Mechanical and operational problems in the steam drum can have a significant impact on cycle chemistry and, therefore, the rest of the plant. Improper operation, mechanical issues, or lack of routine maintenance can cause poor steam quality, poor boiler water quality, and corrosion or deposition of downstream equipment.

This paper will discuss examples of mechanical and operational problems commonly experienced with boiler steam drums and the impacts that these problems can have on cycle chemistry using a case study approach. It will describe the recommended methods and procedures for conducting routine drum testing in order to aid in identification of developing or trending issues

Discusser: HG Sanjay, Bechtel Corporation, Reston, VA

IWC 19-15: What Does That Turbine Deposit Mean?
James Bellows, James Bellows and Associates, Maitland, FL

Impurities in steam will deposit on the steam turbine. The problem of turbine deposition was apparent as early as the 1910s. Deposits reduce turbine efficiency and capacity, lead to corrosion and, in extreme cases, can cause turbine imbalance. Oxides, silicates and salts are among the common deposits, but free metals can also be found occasionally. The composition of the deposit can often reveal the ultimate source of the impurities. Some impurities are due to boiler additives. Others are due to attemporation of the steam during condenser leaks. Still others are the result of redeposition of corrosion products. A review of turbine impurities reveals the common and uncommon species. Potential sources of these species are suggested. Turbine cleaning is discussed.

Discusser: Robin Wright, SUEZ Water Technologies & Solutions, Trevose, PA

IWC 19-16: Minimizing Steam Generator Corrosion and Fouling (Preventing History from Repeating Itself)
Brad Buecker, ChemTreat, Richmond, VA

During the heyday of coal-fired power plant operation, numerous lessons were learned regarding corrosion and fouling in steam generators. Unfortunately, many of these lessons have not transferred well to personnel operating the heat recovery steam generators (HRSGs) of modern combined-cycle units. As at other industries, many experienced power employees have recently retired or will soon be retiring. With them is going much critical expertise regarding water and steam chemistry. Another contributing factor to the lack of knowledge transfer is that combined-cycle units are often minimally staffed, with few or no trained chemistry personnel. This paper discusses several of the most important issues related to high-pressure steam generation chemistry, including:
• Don’t operate with condenser tube leaks.
• For units with no copper alloys (virtually all HRSGs), eliminate the oxygen scavenger.
• Off-line corrosion protection is often grossly underestimated, leading to serious corrosion and carryover of corrosion products to the steam generator.
The final section briefly outlines several other issues that are also of significant importance. The author would be pleased to discuss any of these topics with interested readers

Discusser: Randy Turner, SWAN Analytical USA, Wheeling, IL

 

Back to top

 

Digging in the Dirt for Selenium and Sulfate

IWC Rep: Jay Harwood, SUEZ Water Technologies & Solutions, Oakville, ON, Canada
Session Chair: John Schubert, P.E., HDR, Sarasota, FL
Discussion Leader: David Weakley II, P.E., CNX, Canonsburg, PA

The treatment of mining influenced waters has evolved considerably from the days of adding lime and discharging to a pond. Regulators now regularly include in discharge criteria for new mines more parameters requiring higher levels of treatment. The IWC mining session will address some of those parameters, which seem to be becoming more and more prevalent. Sulfate restrictions in many areas are below 1000 mg/L and can be as low as 250 mg/L, the US EPA secondary drinking water standard. In comparison, some mining streams have been observed at over 10,000 mg/L. Precipitation with lime will only decrease the sulfate concentration to at best the saturation level of calcium sulfate, or about 1400 mg/L.  Other parameters that are frequently of concern to the mining industry include selenium, a variety of metals, and nitrate nitrogen. Papers in this session describe projects involving sulfate removal, selenium removal, chromate removal and ammonia and nitrate removal.  This session should be valuable not only to the mining industry, but for anyone facing treatment issues for metals, sulfate and selenium.

Consider Attending: W1, W3, W8, W10, W11, W15, W17, W20, W21

IWC 19-17: Physio-Biological Removal of Selenium from Mining Impacted Waters
Jonathan Witt, P.E. and Alan Prouty, J.R. Simplot Company, Boise, ID; Jeremy Aulbach, P.E., Brown and Caldwell, Boise, ID

The Smoky Canyon Mine owned by the J.R. Simplot Company constructed the Hoopes Selenium Treatability Study Pilot (Hoopes TSP), which implemented physical and biological treatment to evaluate operational performance of active selenium water treatment from mine-impacted waters. The Smoky Canyon Mine is located within the Idaho Phosphate District, which is rich in sedimentary phosphate ores that are found concurrent with selenium-bearing deposits. Past mining practices have led to elevated levels of selenium in the mine-impacted waters. The physical and biological treatment processes applied include UF, RO, anaerobic biological, and aerobic biological. While these established technologies are routinely applied individually in water treatment, these technologies were applied in an innovative arrangement that shows significant promise in its application to remove selenium from mine-impacted waters. Total selenium concentrations of the mine-impacted waters fed to the Hoopes TSP averaged 0.144 mg/L during the study period presented. Hoopes TSP effluent total selenium concentrations averaged 0.015 mg/L during the study period presented. Details of the mine setting, influent water parameters, treatability study pilot system configuration, and initial 20 weeks of operational results are presented in this paper.

Discusser: Shannon Brown and John Pugh, Bayer U.S. – Crop Science, Creve Coeur, MO; Karen Budgell, P.E., Golder Associates, Inc., Athens, TX

IWC 19-18: Removal of Heavy Metals, Ammonia and Nitrates from Mine Water – A Full Scale System
Srikanth Muddasani, Kashi Banerjee, and Keith Benson, Veolia Water Technologies, Moon Township, PA

A new mine water treatment facility is currently under construction in northwest part of the USA. The objective of this treatment plant is to meet strict regulatory limitations imposed by the DEP for surface water discharge.  The mine water is treated using advanced treatment technology to produce clean water for reuse or discharge. The Paper will describe influent and effluent water qualities, treatment steps and present ion exchange lab study results on heavy metals removal.

Discusser: Robert Simm, Stantec, Chandler, AZ

IWC 19-19: Chromate Removal Performance using a Weak Base Anion Resin to Treat Groundwater at a Texas Remediation Site
Richard Dennis, Martin Lawrence, Brittany Merola and Ignacio Faundez, AdEdge Water Technologies, LLC, Duluth, GA; Peter Meyers, ResinTech, Inc., West Berlin, NJ

There is a Texas wastewater remediation site that has been in operation since 2003 treating contaminated groundwater for the removal of toxic chromate. The water source contains oxidized chromium from chrome plating activities during the 1960’s & 1970’s. Currently, the water contains over 400 micrograms per liter (µg/L) of chromium, most of it present in the toxic Chrome VI form. Total chromium removal to less than 20 µg/L is required before the water can be injected into a nearby array of wells, the primary source of drinking water for the local population. Working with ResinTech, Inc., AdEdge Water Technologies, LLC designed, built and started up a system for the remediation treatment site. This paper will discuss the ion exchange and auxiliary pH adjustment process that was selected for the replacement chromate removal system. It will focus on the salient design features of the system including specifications, ion exchange equipment design parameters, flow configuration and operating flexibility. Selection of the weak base chromate selective resin and its evaluation for this particular water quality played a key role in providing the optimum treatment scheme and will be discussed in detail. Finally, process and analytical data from the system will be discussed since the system was started up in 2018.

Discusser: Harley Schreiber, WesTech Engineering, Inc., Salt Lake City, UT

IWC 19-20: Mine Impacted Water Minimization Technology – 3 Years of Development
Alex Drak, Roi Zaken Porat, and Tomar Efrat, IDE Technologies, Kadima, Israel; Marco Kerstholt, Royal HaskoningDHV, South Africa; Gerald van Houwelingen, Royal HaskoningDHV, Netherlands

A significant amount of water is used in the mining process, and it is often necessary to treat this water, which is characterized by neutral to low pH and moderate to high total dissolved solids content. Sulfate anions, typically present in this water, are introduced largely as a result of partial oxidation of sulfide-bearing ores (often containing pyrite). Calcium cations are also usually present in water as a result of partial dissolution of dolomitic compounds present in the waste rock. These two ions, with combined concentration close to the gypsum saturation limit, make the treatment process of mine impacted water relatively challenging.

Currently, mine impacted water is usually treated by adding lime to neutralize the acid and precipitate heavy metals as hydroxides. After partial acidification, the effluent from this process is recycled or discharged to the receiving environment. Depending on the pH targeted in the neutralization step, this effluent can still contain a relatively high concentration of sulfate and calcium. Increased concern led to the introduction of recommended guideline values for the sulfate concentration in the discharged effluent. Based on World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines, the recommended values for the sulfate concentration are generally below 500 mg/L.

The demand to produce water with sulfate concentration in the 250 – 500 mg/L range poses a technological challenge not yet sufficiently addressed. Therefore, it is necessary to develop new technologies to address these challenges. A recently developed technology, MaxH2O Desalter, containing an RO system with an integrated salt precipitation unit, makes it possible to achieve the required sulfate concentration. This paper presents the results of a 3 year development process of the MaxH2O Desalter technology. Different types of mine impacted water, collected from different mine sites, were treated. The results show that the system can reach recoveries of over 85%, at which the calcium sulfate saturation index theoretically reaches over 1,000%, which could lead to sudden calcium sulfate precipitation on the RO membrane. In practice, in the MaxH2O Desalter process, the calcium sulfate saturation index was maintained in the range of 200% – 400%, by continuous precipitation of carbonate and sulfate compounds in the integrated salt precipitation unit.  The system operated without the addition of chemicals other than antiscalant and calcium carbonate seeds and produced pellets with more than 90% dry solids content, which did not require further sludge dewatering treatment. These results show the significant advantage of the developed system as a treatment alternative for mine impacted water. The developed system saves operational costs compared to current sulfate reduction technologies by decreasing chemical consumption and decreasing the amount of sludge to be discharged, with competitive investment costs given the high water recovery that can be achieved in this new process. If the produced brine were to be treated (e.g., using a high-density sludge treatment process) a very significant reduction in total dissolved solids in the finally discharged water (upon blending the treated brine with permeate) could be realized.

Discusser: Holly Johnson Churman, P.E., GHD, Houston, TX

 

Back to top

 

Harry Water and the Chamber of Sustainability Secrets

IWC Rep: Michele Funk, P.E., Bechtel Corporation, Reston, VA
Session Chair: Mel Butcher, Arcadis, Madison, WI
Discussion Leader: Ronald Ruocco, P.E., Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc., Charlotte, NC

The sustainability focused session boasts a panoply of topics from technology testing and case study results to a tool for aiding with capital cost justification. Session speakers originate from Research and Development to Water Technology. Regardless of what house the speakers are from, they come to share their magic and how it can help your unique industrial setting.

Consider Attending: W1, W3, W8, W10, W11, W15, W17, W21

IWC 19-21: Minimizing Data Center Water and Wastewater – A Case Study
Daniel Sampson, HDR, Walnut Creek, CA

A data center faced increasing pressure to minimize discharge from both its RO system and adiabatic coolers. The RO removes dissolved solids from raw water, allowing adiabatic coolers to operate at higher cycles. Near-term recommendations provided actions to maximize RO recovery, maximize adiabatic cooler cycles, and minimize discharge. Long-term recommendations provided options to allow the recovery all or a portion of the wastewater currently discharged. This case study provides useful information for any facility that uses reverse osmosis and/or adiabatic coolers and which seeks to optimize sustainability by minimizing water usage and wastewater discharge.
A data center located in the Western US faced increasing pressure to minimize wastewater discharge from both the reverse osmosis system and the adiabatic coolers. The RO units remove dissolved solids from the facility’s raw water, allowing the adiabatic coolers to operate at higher cycles of concentration.

The facility wanted to identify improvement options that would maximize reverse osmosis (RO) system recovery and reliability to minimize wastewater discharge. A site visit and subsequent discussions with facility operators and the facility’s specialty chemical supplier provided additional and important background. Data obtained during the assessment included system drawings, operating data, operating/maintenance manuals, cleaning procedures, blank chemistry and mechanical logsheets, various maintenance procedures (analyzers and filter replacements), off-site sampling results, and chemical information.

The facility requested a tiered approach to the analysis. Near-term recommendations provided immediate actions to maximize RO recovery, maximize adiabatic cooler cycles of concentration, and minimize wastewater discharge. Long-term recommendations provided options that would allow the facility to recover all or a portion of the wastewater currently discharged. These long-term recommendations will require pilot testing, the purchase of new equipment, and therefore cannot be implemented in the near-term.

This case study and its recommendations provide useful information for any facility that uses reverse osmosis and/or adiabatic coolers and which seeks to optimize sustainability by minimizing fresh water usage and wastewater discharge.

Discusser: John Van Gehuchten, P.E., McKim & Creed, Sewickley, PA

IWC 19-22: Plant Water Profiler: A Tool for Understanding Water Use, Cost and Savings Potential for Manufacturing Plants
Kristina Armstrong, Mini Malhotra, Sachin Nimbalkar, and Asha Shibu, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN; Rochelle Samuel, Saint-Gobain, Malvern, PA

In the 1746 Poor Richard’s Almanack, Benjamin Franklin published “When the well’s dry, we know the worth of water” (Franklin, 1746); industrial water users have begun to see the truth in these words as they examine the potential and reality of water scarcity becoming a significant business risk. Through the authors’ interactions with manufacturers via the U.S. Department of Energy’s Better Plants program and Strategic Analysis projects, they realized that manufacturing facilities often do not fully understand the risks to the water supply and the consequential risks to their business. Additionally, they noticed that many facilities do not know how their water is used (baselining), how they compare to their peers (benchmarking), the actual cost impacts of water use (true cost of water), and what are potential areas for water savings. This results in a lack of motivation and ability to identify and implement effective water-efficiency measures.
The Plant Water Profiler Tool (PWP) was created to help manufacturing plant management address these issues by identifying and accounting for water use in manufacturing operations, helping determine the true cost of their water, and providing some high-level estimates for peer comparison. The PWP uses a water mass balance and common engineering equations to estimate the water use by each of the facility’s systems (e.g., differentiating process water use from cooling and restroom water use), even when no submetering data is available. This new tool also helps users identify potential areas for water savings and associated water and energy cost savings, making it a potentially useful resource for corporations conducting water assessments. Additionally, governments or private organizations can use the methodology behind this tool to design a survey to help build a database of industrial water use.
This paper and corresponding presentation provides an overview of current industrial water use practices and tools, as well as the value of determining the true cost of water. It also briefly describes the methodology behind the tool, then focuses on its functionality through an industrial case study and lessons learned from implementing the case study.

Discusser: Liza Grudin, P.E., ME, ENV SP, NovelEsolutions, Inc., Seffner, FL

IWC 19-23: Pilot-Testing of a Sustainable Innovative Technology to Treat Emulsified Oil at a Rail Yard Facility
Eric Bergeron, Golder Associates, Inc., Sherbrooke, QC, Canada; Marie-Pier Ross-Pilon, Golder Associates, Inc., Montreal, QC, Canada; Seble Afework, CN, Concord, ON, Canada

Rail yard activities such as gas fuelling, equipment cleaning, and maintenance generate wastewater impacted by hydrocarbons in free –phase or in emulsion. Prior to discharge, water presenting free phase can easily be treated using gravity oil water separator (OWS). However, mechanically (by pump) or chemically (by soap) emulsified hydrocarbons present in water do not decant and OWS are useless. Most of rail yard wastewater treatment system consist in a dissolved air flotation (DAF) system that precipitate the hydrocarbons using coagulants and polymers. The process involves utilization of chemicals and need less manpower resource for operation and maintenance. Furthermore, the sludge generated contains ferric coagulant and it is difficult to valorize. Sludge are usually disposed off-site as an hazardous waste which is costly.
CN has mandated Golder to conduct an evaluation of a sustainable technology to treat their wastewater at one of their yard located in Montreal. The technology tested is based on the treatment of the wastewater using a centrifuge system. The process involves using the centrifuge force to recover emulsified hydrocarbons. The process requires minimal manpower and present much smaller footprint than a DAF system. When no chemical is used, the free oil is recovered, and it can be valorised the same way as the free phase from the OWS. The pilot performed show promising results for the applicability of the centrifuge to rail yard wastewater.

Discusser: Chris Hertle, M.Phil, GHD, Irvine, CA

IWC 19-24: Breaking the Mold: Direct to Disc for Treating River Water
Bridget Finnegan, EIT, Veolia Water Technologies, Moon Township, PA; Behrang Pakzadeh, Ph.D., P.E., Kiewit, Lenexa, KS; William Blandford, Hydrotech, Vellinge, Sweden

Veolia’s Hydrotech Discfilter is being used to treat river water, disrupting the long-standing preference for high-rate sand-ballasted clarifiers as the first unit of operation. Ultrafiltration membranes and media filters have also been used for river water treatment, especially in less turbid surface waters, and disc filtration has the potential to replace them in the market. Because many facilities use surface water as their primary water source, the technology selection for river water treatment affects a wide variety of industries, including power, downstream oil and gas, and aquaculture.
Direct to Disc is the name of the application where disc filters are used to treat river water with only a bar screen and chemical pretreatment upstream. The major attraction of Direct to Disc is the significantly lower equipment cost necessary in comparison to the other available technologies.
Several Direct to Disc installations already exist globally, but data is still limited for this concept. The discfilter has thousands of installations removing suspended solids at high flow rates in other types of applications but comparatively few for make-up water directly from a river. The data from the Direct to Disc installations will be presented in order to project the best achievable filtrate quality as well as the technical limitations.
River water fluctuates more drastically than most applications and the solids are often silt or algae growth. This can present challenges for the discfilter application. The chemical pretreatment is relatively similar between the different technologies, so the operational costs are comparable. However, the capital cost savings in a broad range of flow rates have driven several power clients to use disc filters instead of the traditional high-rate clarifiers. The paper will address the operational risks and how they can be controlled in both design and operation.
This paper discusses three case studies of river water treatment applications. Using the same design basis, the capital costs of using Direct to Disc is compared to the capital costs of the other technologies. The paper will also discuss the total suspended solids limits for using disc filters for Direct to Disc and the influent conditions where a discfilter is more economically viable.

Discusser: Kristen Cooper, P.E., PMP, Duke Energy, St. Petersburg, FL

 

Back to top

 

The Future of Industrial Water Treatment: Efficiency and Innovation Win the Day!

IWC Rep: Tom Lawry, McKim & Creed, Sewickley, PA
Session Chair: Katie Bland, P.E., Burns & McDonnell, Kansas City, MO
Discussion Leader: Chip Westaby, Turner Designs Hydrocarbon Instruments, Kirkwood, MO

For industrial water treatment, tightening environmental regulations and water scarcity are leading to more innovative solutions for water use. Industrial facilities are looking at more options for treatment and reuse of water and wastewater, which sometimes requires a more creative approach for a cost-effective solution. In this session, we will examine several examples in industrial water treatment that required an evaluation of updated technologies and innovative solutions to make the project successful. These examples fall in various industries and cover cost and feasibility analyses of multiple treatment technologies.

Consider Attending: W1, W3, W5, W6, W8, W10, W11, W12, W13, W15, W17, W21

IWC 19-25: Greenfield Integrated Wastewater Treatment Solution, for Sasol Chemicals Complex, Lake Charles, Louisiana, USA
Anthony Gibson, Sasol LLC, Westlake, LA; Brian Arntsen, SUEZ Water Technologies & Solutions, Oakville, ON, Canada; Richard Ubaldi, SUEZ Water Technologies & Solutions, Richmond, VA

Sasol has expanded their Lake Charles, LA commodity chemicals complex capacity. To support plant operations, SUEZ designed four water treatment systems:

  • Raw Water – Sabine River canal water
  • Demineralized Water – Make up high purity water
  • Condensate Polishing – Treats return steam condensate
  • Wastewater – Combines wastewater streams

This paper will present key information related to the treatment processes, start-up and operation, giving special attention to design recommendations required to achieve consistent treated wastewater quality.

Discusser: Vina Arjomandnia, Fluor, Sugar Land, TX

IWC 19-26: Advanced Wastewater Recycle at an Automotive Plant in Silao, Mexico
Brian Moore, Ph.D., Arcadis, Clifton Park, NY

A major automotive manufacturer manufactures engines, transmissions, and full-size trucks at a large manufacturing complex in Silao, Guanajuato, Mexico. The Site employs approximately 6,000 personnel. Additionally, there are approximately 4,000 contracted employees on site in any given day. The site has experienced dramatic growth and is currently under construction to add nearly 3 million square feet of new production facilities.
For all freshwater the Site relies on six groundwater wells, which they must frequently rotate (in/out of service) to obtain the water needed for manufacturing operations. In addition to very high taxes for groundwater extraction, the aquifer levels are declining; the aquifer has been identified as stressed and the region is expected to have continued growth in population, agriculture and industry (World Bank, 2004). As such, the aquifer cannot provide the additional 30-40% water required following the plant expansion.
Considering its environmental goals, the status of the region and aquifer, and to reduce production disruption risk, the automotive manufacturer has embarked on a comprehensive water recycling program to maximize water reuse for manufacturing processes.
An array of concepts for treatment and recycle were developed and vetted relative to key project criteria (e.g. percent of wastewater recycled, robustness, operability, CapEx and OpEx, etc). The treatment train selected for this new water recycle system includes a membrane bioreactor (MBR) and two-stage reverse osmosis (RO) in Phase I; the performance/operability of these processes benefit from strategic upstream and waste segregation components to the project. A future phase of the project would include on- site treatment of the brine from the RO process, recovering even more water through application of zero-liquid discharge technology (evaporator/ crystallizer combination with mechanical vapor recompression).
During this IWC presentation, we intend to walk the audience through the entire process for Phase 1 of the project, including feasibility assessment, water and constituent mass balance, concept development and refinement, design, construction, and start-up (on-line Feb 2019). We will also discuss Phase II of the project.

Discusser: Diane Martini, Burns & McDonnell, Chicago, IL

IWC 19-27: Leveraging Advances in Industrial Waste Water Treatment: Technology Review and Operating Case
Shannon Brown, Bayer Crop Science, Saint Louis, MO; Elaina Mason, Bayer Crop Science, Muscatine, IA

Key advances in water treatment processes can be leveraged to allow for improved performance at lower net cost, through unit operation upgrades or process design changes. One common challenge faced by industrial waste water systems is that of keeping infrastructure and processes optimized for changing demands and chemistries while balancing operations and maintenance costs. Such variances can make maintaining treated water quality with existent equipment difficult. In this paper, an industrial waste water treatment facility that has been operating since the early 1970s is considered. This site successfully treats waste water from an herbicide production facility, digesting residual product, and removing constituents of interest from the effluent stream prior to discharge. The treatment process includes: equalization and pH adjustment, aerobic biotreatment, clarification, primary and polishing filtration, and dewatering. Like many industrial applications, the water treatment system manages fluctuating influent chemistry due to batch production regimes. Over the life of the facility, system upgrades have been implemented for process optimization and increased capacity. In this paper, the authors review new technologies developed over the last 50 years that could be applied to this site to improve operations or reduce cost. A survey of current waste water treatment processes is conducted. Using the current installed waste water treatment system as a basis for case study, analysis is conducted as to what impact new technologies could have upon improving this operation.

Discusser: Bob Wenta, Veolia Water Technologies, Moon Township, PA

IWC 19-28: Water Balance & Water Quality for Contact Cooling Water in a Steel Mill
Kyle Vester and Diane Martini, Burns & McDonnell, Chicago, IL

Contact cooling water for hot rolling steel has varying water quality and volume requirements depending on the grade of steel required. A client desired new product lines which require better water quality and faster cooling to achieve the desired steel properties compared to generic stainless steels. Burns & McDonnell performed a water balance and quality study for a North American steel mill to determine if the existing system required upgrades to meet the new water quality and flow rates required by related upgrades to the process.

This paper will discuss the development of a water balance and the analysis of the water quality across the system. The water balance determined the existing system could not reliably provide the required flows and recommended upsizing the process cooling water pumps to meet the new demand. Analysis of the system’s water quality revealed higher chlorides than expected based on source water and observed cycling within the system. Further investigation found that softener wastewater was routed into the closed system rather than to an outfall. Rerouting this waste stream to an outfall was recommended over adding a treatment system to the process cooling water system.

Discusser: Ivan Morales, Integrated Sustainability, Inc., Houston, TX

Back to top