Water Online the Magazine gives Water & Wastewater Engineers and end-users a venue to find project solutions and source valuable product information. We aim to educate the engineering and operations community on important issues and trends.
Issue link: http://wateronline.epubxp.com/i/501621
Based on the average values calculated for the entire sampling period, Table 2 provides the preliminary ranking of WWTP (in terms of emission potential) based on individual EFs. The overall ranking was established by taking into account the individual EF rankings generated based on various EF calculations. Table 2: Comparison Of Ranking Of Sampling Locations Sampling Location Individual EF Ranking Overall Ranking EF-Flow EF-Population EF-Area Bridge City 2 1 2 2 Marrero 1 2 1 1 Harvey 4 3 3 3 East Bank 3 4 4 4 (Note: Rank of 1 indicates highest H 2 S emissions, and 4 indicates lowest.) In an attempt to understand the differences in the EFs from various treatment plants, attention was directed to: 1. analyzing wastewater parameters, and 2. the type of collection system. Research was also performed to generate an empirical formula to forecast H 2 S emissions. Discussions of these items are beyond the scope of this article, however. Conclusion Based on the literature review, it was observed that the conventional air emission studies are resource-intensive and time-consuming and typically require an outside agency to perform testing, data collection, and interpretation. Present studies also do not establish any emissions model that can be used by in-house municipal staff for predicting H 2 S emissions in their respective sewer system. Discussions with Jefferson Parish municipalities revealed that an in-house air emission testing capability would serve as a great tool to identify potential locations for health risk, odor, and corrosion hot spots, particularly due to H 2 S emissions. This study serves as a demonstration tool for using EFs to ascertain H 2 S ranges. Based on the findings of this study, future experiments can be designed to expand this air emission tool for other closed treatment units and collection systems. Also, similar studies can be designed to ascertain concentrations of multiple gases associated with sewers. The results of this study provide a range of EFs for four WWTP headworks based on wastewater flow handled, population served, and the service area. These EFs can be used by the Jefferson Parish personnel in understanding the day-to-day H 2 S emission potential of headworks at these various WWTPs by knowing one of the variables: (a) flow rate, (b) population, or (c) service area. Emission potential at other headworks of WWTPs of similar size and scope can be estimated using the EFs presented in this paper. wateronline.com ■ Water Innovations Amitdyuti Sengupta, Ph.D., serves as program manager for the Jefferson Parish Sewer Capital Improvements Program, managing close to $85 million of wastewater-related projects. His work includes wastewater, stormwater, and air quality projects. He can be reached at asengupta@jeffparish.net. Linda Daly, PE has been the director of the Jefferson Parish Department of Sewerage since March 2011. In this position, she oversees a department of 200 employees with a $30 million annual operating budget. Bhaskar Kura, Ph.D., PE, is Associate Dean of Engineering, Program Development; Professor of Civil & Environmental Engineering; and Director of Maritime Environmental Resources & Information Center (MERIC) at the University of New Orleans. About The Authors 22 To reduce detrimental health, social, and economic impacts, air quality management tools such as emission factor (EF) for estimating H 2 S emissions from a wide variety of sources including wastewater facilities are very useful. HEADWORKSANDSCREENING