英国废水工业中化学除磷的不同方法

IF 1.7 4区 环境科学与生态学 Q4 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
O. Hernandez-Ramirez, A. Thompson
{"title":"英国废水工业中化学除磷的不同方法","authors":"O. Hernandez-Ramirez, A. Thompson","doi":"10.1111/wej.12909","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Water companies in the United Kingdom are currently facing unprecedented tightening of phosphorus discharge consents, which will only become stricter in the near future. Historically, the most widely applied method of phosphorus removal has been chemical precipitation through the addition of iron or aluminium salts. Although more sustainable options, such as biological processes, are already being implemented at key sites, data shows that chemical removal is likely to remain an integral part of wastewater treatment—whether as the main method in small or problematic works or as a trim for meeting consents below 1 mg/L, not achievable through biological removal alone. All sewage treatment providers in the United Kingdom have developed asset standards (internal design and operation guidelines) for the design and management of chemical precipitation at existing works. However, the approach has not been consistent throughout the sector, with wide variations of criteria, brackets and rules of thumb. This paper collates and compares these approaches, looking at asset standards from most of the water companies in the United Kingdom. The methods stated in these standards have been applied for the sizing of chemical phosphorus removal on four simulated sites, to meet theoretical consents based upon the future discharge requirements set by the Environment Agency under the Water Industry National Environment Programme.","PeriodicalId":23753,"journal":{"name":"Water and Environment Journal","volume":"40 3-4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The different approaches to chemical phosphorus removal across the UK wastewater industry\",\"authors\":\"O. Hernandez-Ramirez, A. Thompson\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/wej.12909\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Water companies in the United Kingdom are currently facing unprecedented tightening of phosphorus discharge consents, which will only become stricter in the near future. Historically, the most widely applied method of phosphorus removal has been chemical precipitation through the addition of iron or aluminium salts. Although more sustainable options, such as biological processes, are already being implemented at key sites, data shows that chemical removal is likely to remain an integral part of wastewater treatment—whether as the main method in small or problematic works or as a trim for meeting consents below 1 mg/L, not achievable through biological removal alone. All sewage treatment providers in the United Kingdom have developed asset standards (internal design and operation guidelines) for the design and management of chemical precipitation at existing works. However, the approach has not been consistent throughout the sector, with wide variations of criteria, brackets and rules of thumb. This paper collates and compares these approaches, looking at asset standards from most of the water companies in the United Kingdom. The methods stated in these standards have been applied for the sizing of chemical phosphorus removal on four simulated sites, to meet theoretical consents based upon the future discharge requirements set by the Environment Agency under the Water Industry National Environment Programme.\",\"PeriodicalId\":23753,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Water and Environment Journal\",\"volume\":\"40 3-4\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Water and Environment Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/wej.12909\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Water and Environment Journal","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/wej.12909","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

英国的自来水公司目前正面临着前所未有的磷排放许可收紧,在不久的将来只会变得更加严格。历史上,应用最广泛的除磷方法是通过添加铁或铝盐的化学沉淀法。虽然更可持续的选择,如生物处理,已经在关键地点实施,但数据显示,化学去除可能仍然是废水处理的一个组成部分——无论是作为小型或有问题的工程的主要方法,还是作为满足1毫克/升以下许可的一种修剪,仅通过生物去除是无法实现的。联合王国的所有污水处理供应商都为现有工程的化学沉淀的设计和管理制定了资产标准(内部设计和操作准则)。然而,这种做法在整个部门并不一致,标准、括号和经验法则各不相同。本文对这些方法进行了整理和比较,考察了英国大多数水务公司的资产标准。这些标准中所述的方法已应用于四个模拟场地的化学除磷施胶,以满足环境局根据水工业国家环境计划制定的未来排放要求的理论同意。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The different approaches to chemical phosphorus removal across the UK wastewater industry
Water companies in the United Kingdom are currently facing unprecedented tightening of phosphorus discharge consents, which will only become stricter in the near future. Historically, the most widely applied method of phosphorus removal has been chemical precipitation through the addition of iron or aluminium salts. Although more sustainable options, such as biological processes, are already being implemented at key sites, data shows that chemical removal is likely to remain an integral part of wastewater treatment—whether as the main method in small or problematic works or as a trim for meeting consents below 1 mg/L, not achievable through biological removal alone. All sewage treatment providers in the United Kingdom have developed asset standards (internal design and operation guidelines) for the design and management of chemical precipitation at existing works. However, the approach has not been consistent throughout the sector, with wide variations of criteria, brackets and rules of thumb. This paper collates and compares these approaches, looking at asset standards from most of the water companies in the United Kingdom. The methods stated in these standards have been applied for the sizing of chemical phosphorus removal on four simulated sites, to meet theoretical consents based upon the future discharge requirements set by the Environment Agency under the Water Industry National Environment Programme.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Water and Environment Journal
Water and Environment Journal 环境科学-湖沼学
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
67
审稿时长
18-36 weeks
期刊介绍: Water and Environment Journal is an internationally recognised peer reviewed Journal for the dissemination of innovations and solutions focussed on enhancing water management best practice. Water and Environment Journal is available to over 12,000 institutions with a further 7,000 copies physically distributed to the Chartered Institution of Water and Environmental Management (CIWEM) membership, comprised of environment sector professionals based across the value chain (utilities, consultancy, technology suppliers, regulators, government and NGOs). As such, the journal provides a conduit between academics and practitioners. We therefore particularly encourage contributions focussed at the interface between academia and industry, which deliver industrially impactful applied research underpinned by scientific evidence. We are keen to attract papers on a broad range of subjects including: -Water and wastewater treatment for agricultural, municipal and industrial applications -Sludge treatment including processing, storage and management -Water recycling -Urban and stormwater management -Integrated water management strategies -Water infrastructure and distribution -Climate change mitigation including management of impacts on agriculture, urban areas and infrastructure
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信