My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Item A-MWMC Facilities Plan
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Council Agendas 2004
>
CCAgenda-05/19/04WS
>
Item A-MWMC Facilities Plan
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/9/2010 1:11:10 PM
Creation date
5/12/2004 3:16:01 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
City_Council_Document_Type
Agenda Item Summary
CMO_Meeting_Date
5/19/2004
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
349
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
MWMC FACILITIES PLAN <br /> <br /> New hot water heat exchangers will be needed. A typical TPAD process requires <br /> undigested sludge to be heated to 54°C (130°F) prior to entering the thermophilic <br /> digester. Further evaluation of the heat exchangers is needed. <br /> <br />· New boilers may be needed to supply the necessary hot water to the existing heat <br /> exchangers. Further evaluation of the boilers is needed to determine if they can supply <br /> enough hot water to increase undigested sludge to thermophilic temperatures. <br /> <br />· New sludge/sludge heat exchangers are needed. These will serve as pre-heat treatment <br /> to the hot water heat exchangers and in recovering heat from the heated sludge after the <br /> thermophilic retention time. <br /> <br />· Four new 5-day SRT thermophilic tanks m~d one mesophilic tank would be constructed. <br /> The existing digesters could be used in the TPAD process (they would serve as the <br /> mesophilic tank). Volume required for thermophilic digestion would need to be 1.4 MG <br /> (based on 2025 WWMM flows), or 354,000 gallons per tank (based on four tanks). The <br /> new mesophilic digester would be the same size as the existing digesters. <br /> <br />· I&C modifications would be required. <br /> <br />Recommendations <br />Table 6.5.2-2 presents a preliminary project cost and non-monetary comparison between the <br />alternatives. Costs are based on industry averages for treatment plants of a size similar to <br />the WPCF. <br /> <br />TABLE 6.5.2-2 <br />Digestion Alternatives Cost Comparison <br />MWMC Facilities Plan, Eugene-Springfield <br /> <br /> Project Cost <br /> Process (millions of dollars) Non-Monetary Rating(a) <br /> <br />Mesophilic Digestion $5-$6M 21 <br />TPAD $11-$13.5M 21 <br />Pre-Pasteurization $13.5-$16M 16 <br />"Maximum possible score of 30 points <br /> <br />As can be seen from Table 6.5.2-2, construction of a conventional mesophilic digester has the <br />lowest project cost and is the same as TPAD for the highest non-monetary rating. The <br />primary reason for the high non-monetary rating is that the process performance is well- <br />known and Eugene operational staff are accustomed to operating and maintaining digesters <br />of this type. Pre-pasteurization has the highest project cost and the lowest non-monetary <br />rating. However, the thermophilic pasteurization tanks are much smaller (6,000 gallons <br />versus 354,000 gallons) than those required for TPAD operation and siting may be easier. <br />TPAD has the second highest project cost and is the same as mesophilic digestion for the <br />highest non-monetary rating. The benefits that TPAD provides, when considering the issues <br />associated with downstream processes (VSS loading on the FSLs), makes this alternative <br />attractive for achieving long-term goals of meeting solids stabilization requirements with <br /> <br />6-38 MWMC_6.0_REV11.DOC <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.