PURE 2ⁿᵈ Newsletter, November 2011
Options and experiences of sustainable sludge management for municipalities in the Baltic Sea Region
Editorial
Dear Reader,
Sludge management is an integral part of any modern municipal waste water treatment plant. During recent years many efforts have been put to efficient nutrient removal from the municipal sewage in the Baltic Sea region. They aimed to reduce eutrophication burden to the fragile Baltic sea by fulfilling relevant requirements, including the HELCOM recommendation. These good and long awaited activities however raised concerns over the management of sewage sludge, in which the removed nutrients are contained. The sludge should be handled sustainably and efficiently, so that the nutrients are not released back to the watercourses, while material and energy content of sludge could be utilized. Large amounts of sewage sludge generated in waste water treatment plants provide numerous opportunities for beneficial use e.g. in power generation, soil improvement and even nutrient recycling. These are dependent on quality of sludge and processes of a particular treatment plant – and the national legislation.
The Project on Urban Reduction of Eutrophication (PURE) aims on improving the sludge management of its partner water companies and also maps the good practices and challenges in different countries of the region. These will be published as a guidebook for water companies next year. In September 2011 PURE organized a successful workshop on sustainable sludge handling in Lübeck, Germany, where the problems and possibilities were discussed. This Newsletter consists of interviews of both PURE partners and some of the most progressive water companies in the region to showcase different options and possibilities for sustainable sludge management practices.
Mikhail Durkin
Professional Secretary, Baltic Marine Environment Protection Commission HELCOM

Contents
Sludge handling challenges and opportunities in Szczecin, Riga and Lübeck – interviews with PURE partner water utilities
- Ryszard Rydzyński, Technical Manager, ZWiK Sp. z o.o., Szczecin, Poland
- Maris Zviedris, Head of the WWTP, and Maris Tralmaks, Riga Water Ltd., Latvia
- Enno Thyen, Dipl. Biol., Sewage Management Facilities Lübeck, Germany
Practical sludge management alternatives – PURE associated partners share their experiences
- Composting and landscaping, Tommi Fred, HSY Water, Wastewater Treatment, Head of Department
- Incineration of large amounts of sludge, and geotube processing for old sludges, Olga Rublevskaya, St. Petersburg Vodokanal
- Combining research and practical solutions, Jörn Einfeldt, Privatinstitut für Klärtechnik, PIK
Sludge handling challenges and opportunities in Szczecin, Riga and Lübeck – interviews with PURE partner water utilities
- What is the biggest challenge or problem in your current sludge management situation?
- How did you find PURE Lübeck workshop answering these needs?
- How will the sharing of experiences and studies that we do in PURE help to develop sludge management more economical and sustainable?
Ryszard Rydzyński, Technical Manager, ZWiK Sp. z o.o., Szczecin, Poland
(two treatment plants: Pomorzany WWTP, design capacity 418 000 p.e. and Zdroje WWTP, design capacity 177 000 p.e.)
1. Pomorzany: Dewatering of sludge with belt presses – instead of designed dry solids (DS) of 25% we are receiving DS(mean) of 19,7%. Zdroje: Dewatering of sludge with centrifuges – instead of designed DS of 25% we are receiving DS(mean) of 21,9%. Both during strict 14 days tests.
2. and 3. Thanks to visiting modern WWTPs being in contact with more experienced colleagues. modern plant managers and consultants from Germany and Finland we have the chance to receive useful remarks and transfer their experiences to us and other PURE partners. We are waiting for the PURE report concerning the sludge handling. I think it will support us and other partners in more efficient sludge handling. Workshop in Lübeck was a very practical platform of exchanging experiences with consultants and Lübeck WWTP staff as well as with PURE partners.
ToC - Top
Maris Zviedris, Head of the WWTP, and Maris Tralmaks, Riga Water Ltd., Latvia
(WWTP Daugavgriva's design capacity 750 000 – 1 000 000 p.e.)
1. Riga Water is on the way to develop sustainable sludge treatment system by improving biogas extraction process and reaching higher sludge dry solids content after dewatering, at the same time reducing overall expenses for sludge handling.
2. PURE workshop in Lübeck was a great opportunity for Riga Water to compare experiences of many countries, and to get to know with brand new technologies and research for deeper understanding of sludge processing.
3. After years of cooperation with PURE partners we are like friends. Friends are telling not only success stories about using different technologies but also sharing experiences in exposure to shortcomings. Riga Water is sure that we will gain from PURE project enough information to develop our own most reliable, energy efficient and sustainable sludge management.
ToC - Top
Enno Thyen, Dipl. Biol., Sewage Management Facilities Lübeck, Germany
(Lübeck WWTP’s design capacity 400 000 p.e.)
1. Although we have established a complete process of sludge handling including digestion, energy use, dewatering and agricultural disposal corresponding to recognized technical standards in Germany, we face different future demands. There is an uncertainty concerning the development of the legal situation, and we have to decide what to do with our 22 year old dewatering devices within the next years (renovation or new devices using alternative technology). Last, but not least we always have to take into account the cost efficiency regarding investments and operational expenses. Making the right decisions for the future is rather complicated due to the high complexity of sludge handling with many dependencies such as nitrogen in reject waters, energy consumption, carbon dioxide balance and so on.
2. The workshop gave us many good opportunities for an intensive discussion about all important items. Generally we found, that all the partners are dealing with the same points of interest, whether we spoke about phosphorus recovery, enhancement of gas production, combined heat and power units or the question of disposal.
3. It will help all project partners (and maybe others as well!) by giving good examples of the practices, giving opportunities for sharing of knowledge and experiences. It will also help indirectly by giving argumentation aid concerning investment decisions.
ToC - Top
Practical sludge management alternatives – PURE associated partners share their experiences
Mr. Tommi Fred, HSY Water, Wastewater Treatment, Head of Department

|
HSY Water is part of a regional environmental services authority. Before 2010 Helsinki Water was a municipal enterprise. Has this recent reorganization created any new challenges in the sludge management?
In the reorganization all the wastewater functions in the Helsinki Metropolitan Area were put together and Wastewater Division inside HSY was formed. Sludge composting is done in different ways in Espoo and Helsinki due to existing contracts. From 2013 on, all sludge will be composted in HSY composting area at Sipoo and delivered to market in soil and compost products.
Do you see any critical development needs in the future, e.g. changes in markets or legislation for landscaping soil products?
Soil product markets are developing well. Currently the market demand is higher than we actually can produce. General economic situation can naturally affect the soil product demand. The product we are currently producing is of very high quality. It is an excellent product for all kind of green building applications like gardens and parks. Customer feedback is very positive.
Do you think that sludge-bound nutrients should be recycled more efficiently in the society, i.e. mainly used in agricultural production?
Part of our composted biosolids are used in agricultural production. By that that we recycle valuable nitrogen and phosphorus back to food production. Farmland is often poor in humus, which affects farming properties of the land. Compost products contain high amount of organic material. Usage of compost products in farmlands is improving the physical properties of the land, which has positive effect on the growth of the crops. Compost is low in heavy metals but the latest concern are the organic micropollutants in sludge products. Nutrient recycling is necessary in the long term since there are limited resources of phosphorus in the world. The clear positive effects sludge has on the farmland have to be evaluated against possible negative effects of the micropollutants while making decisions on farmland use of sludge products.
ToC - Top
Ms. Olga Rublevskaya, SUE Vodokanal of St.Petersburg, Wastewater Disposal Systems, Director

|
What are your experiences in solving the practical problems in wastewater sludge incineration in large amounts?
Major part of our WWTP operations is the treatment and utilization of the generated sludge. We dewater all the sludge and until 1997 it was taken to two landfills, which were fillin up. Without any additional measures, we should have enlarged the landfills – especially with the new South-Western (SW) treatment plant to be constructed. Vodokanal surveyed the market and world experience of sludge incineration technologies and decided to use French fluidized bed incineration technology with the specific feature of autothermal incineration, thanks to the calorific value of the sludge itself. In 1997 an incineration plant was built to the Central (C) WWTP with four furnaces, each with a capacity of 250 t/day of dry solids (DS). After putting them into operation we had 48% of the whole sludge amount incinerated, and the volume of sludge to be treated was decreased tenfold. With the ash there is no odor or nutrient leaching problems and it is transported to landfills. We could furthermore produce heat power needed for the residents of a nearby island.
Thanks to the advantages of sludge incineration we had by 2007 launched two more incineration plants with two furnaces each: at Northern (N) WWTP (186 t DS/d) and at SW WWTP (88 t DS/d). Sludge from the city’s 14 small and mid-sized WWTPs is also delivered to the incineration plants. We achieved 100 % of incineration of our sludge in 2007. The new incineration plants are equipped with steam generators and thus we get electric power for 11 % of our own needs for SW and N WWTPs. Plants fully meet all the requirements of the EC Directive 2000/76 for incineration conditions and emissions of pollutants into the air from waste incinerators. However, the construction of the incineration plants was quite difficult. The C and N incinerators were constructed by a French company and the SW by a German company. There are differences in the flue gas cleaning processes: for C and SW it is wet gas cleaning and for N dry gas cleaning – the latter for the first time for us. They have also different supply systems of the sludge to the incineration.
Will there be some sludge management changes in the future?
We are planning to install digesters that will allow us to increase our sludge energy potential – practically that means 40 % more. Then we can cover our energy needs with over 50 % and reduce the dependence of external power resources. This improves the quality of the sludge and reduces its volume.
In our prognosis for 2025 the amount of wastewater to be treated will decrease because of flow meters and recycling. However our “Neva untreated wastewater discharge closure programme” still has 7 % of wastewaters to be collected for treatment. We are also planning to reconstruct and modernize three new WWTPs of 2500 – 120 000 m³/d capacities e.g. in Lomonosov and Metallostroy.
What have been the biggest benefits with treating old landfilled sludge with geotubing?
|
Over the years 4.9 million m³ of sludge was stockpiled in our two landfills, so they are filled up to critical levels. Sludge stored is a heterogeneous mass with c. 23-25% of dry solids and c. 33-35% of minerals, containing inclusions. Obviously, such sludge can’t be used in its initial state; therefore we needed a method for preliminary treatment. After technical and economic comparison the static dewatering of the sludge in geotubes was selected. Geotubes don’t need constructing of facilities or installations of devices and thus spare parts or maintenance breaks are not needed. Dewatering is non-stop until complete removal of the reject water in parallel with biostabilization and geoconsolidation of the solid phase.
Now 10 % of the sludge in our Northern landfill has been storaged in geotubes. There is no rain or winter weather influence, which means no hazards or impacts to the environment and no smell problems. The soil product is dewatered, stabilized, and heavy metals are tightly bound. In 2016, 100% of the old sludge will be treated this way. We have developed ways to use this material for landscaping and to enrich the poor urban soils for green areas. We are planning to release half of Northern landfill territory by 2016 and plant trees there. Rest of the area will be divided in two parts, technical land/soil (for SNiP construction rules) and a reserve area (for sludge storage from WWTPs in special occasions like service works at the sludge incineration plant).
ToC - Top
Mr. Jörn Einfeldt, Privatinstitut für Klärtechnik PIK GmbH, CEO, Dr.-Ing.

|
How do you combine your expertise in research and development of new methods with practical problems at WWTPs?
We started our “Privatinstitut für Klärtechnik” in the early nineties as a spin-off company from the Technical University Hamburg, and in our first two projects we supervised the operation control of two pilot plants, which were owned by the state of Schleswig-Holstein and which were designed to examine new methods of biological nitrogen removal. So from the beginning we had a very close view on practical problems. Many of our WWTP-partners know us for more than 10-15 years, and both of us have learned a lot by such a long and close cooperation on operating WWTPs. We share many different operators’ experiences, and with our scientific background and the assistance of our own laboratory we can provide practical solutions for many difficult operating situations. This is one step beyond classical consulting and designing.
What are the biggest advantages in having a science-based approach in your work?
It’s the mixture that matters. Not every question on water treatment needs a scientific answer. But with our scientific background we know the limits of possibility as well as the error possibilities in control systems or human thinking. On the other hand, sometimes we have situations which are very special, i.e. in industrial wastewater treatment, and there might be no solution in our or anybody else’s experience. Then individual research has to be started. Scientific methods are needed in finding the economical and practical applicable solutions.
ToC - Top
Imprint
PURE 2ⁿᵈ Newsletter, November 2011
Published by PURE, www.purebalticsea.eu
Editing and photos: Lotta Ruokanen, HELCOM (lotta.ruokanen@helcom.fi, mob. +358 (40) 162 2054
PURE Coordinator: Hannamaria Yliruusi, UBC (hannamaria.yliruusi@ubc.net), mob. +358 (44) 9075 993
PURE partners: Union of the Baltic Cities, John Nurminen Foundation (FI), Baltic Marine Environment Protection Commission HELCOM, Riga water Ltd. (LV), Brest Vodokanal (BY), Jurmala Water (LV), Water and Sewage Company of Szczecin ZWiK (PL), Sewage Management Facilities Lübeck (DE), Järve Biopuhastus OÜ (EST), City of Gdansk (PL), Mariehamn Town (FI)
ToC - Top