Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
May, 2007
iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
ABSTRACT
The choice of wastewater treatment plants for any application depends on the
quality of raw sewage, the required quality of treated water and the economics
resources available to pay for both capital cost and operating cost of the treatment
plants. The performance of any wastewater treatment plants does not only depend on
the construction cost but will also cover the cost and method of operation and
maintenance, quality of effluent treated, internal, external and design factors. While
potential for identifying a better type of wastewater treatment plant does exist, very
modest efforts have been attempted. This study compares and contrasts two of the
most commonly used extended aeration systems for small to medium size sewage
treatment plants, namely prefabricated reinforced fibreglass and cast in-situ systems.
The selected treatment plants are under the jurisdiction of Indah Water Konsortium
Sdn. Bhd. (IWK), Terengganu. The flow of raw sewage and the performance of the
treatment plants based on effluent quality (i.e. BOD, COD and SS) and electricity
cost were assessed. Three treatment plants from both types of systems were studied
for a period of five months. It was found that a small to medium size treatment
plants suffer high variation in term of flow and organic loading. It seemed obvious
that the cast in-situ treatment plants not only built structurally better and ease of
operation, but also giving better effluent standard and consumed lower electricity
cost.
v
ABSTRAK
Pemilihan loji pengolahan kumbahan untuk apa jua tujuan adalah bergantung
kepada kualiti air kumbahan atau sisa, kehendak kualiti air yang diolah dan
kemampuan sumber kewangan untuk membiayai kos pembinaan dan operasi loji
kumbahan tersebut. Tahap pencapaian mana-mana loji pengolahan kumbahan bukan
sahaja bergantung kepada kos pembinaannya, tetapi juga bergantung kepada kos dan
cara ianya beroperasi dan diselenggarakan, kualiti kumbahan yang telah diolah,
faktor-faktor dalaman, luaran dan rekabentuk loji pengolahan itu sendiri. Walaupun
wujudnya potensi untuk mengenal pasti jenis-jenis loji pengolahan kumbahan yang
lebih berdaya saing, namun usaha ke arah ini masih belum lagi dilaksanakan dengan
lebih menyeluruh. Kajian ini adalah untuk membuat perbandingan dan mencari
perbezaan antara dua loji pengolahan kumbahan jenis pengudaraan lanjutan yang
paling popular, iaitu prefabricated reinforced fiberglass dan cast in-situ. Loji-loji
pengolahan yang telah dipilih untuk kajian ini adalah di bawah seliaan Indah Water
Konsortium Sdn. Bhd. (IWK), Terengganu. Kuantiti air kumbahan, dan pencapaian
loji-loji pengolahan kumbahan dinilai berdasarkan kepada kualiti efluen (seperti
BOD, COD dan SS) dan kos penggunaan tenaga elektrik. Tiga loji dari dua jenis
sistem pengudaraan lanjutan telah dikaji dalam tempoh lima bulan. Adalah didapati
bahawa loji-loji yang bersaiz kecil ke sederhana mengalami gangguan perbezaan
influen yang ketara, atau pun perbezaan di antara influen dan beban pencemaran.
Dalam kajian ini, loji cast in-situ bukan sahaja mempunyai struktur yang lebih baik
dan lebih mudah untuk diselenggarakan, tetapi juga menghasilkan tahap efluen yang
lebih baik dan penggunaan tenaga elektrik yang lebih rendah.
vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER TITLE
PAGE
DECLARATION ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT iii
ABSTRACT iv
ABSTRAK v
TABLES OF CONTENTS vi
LIST OF TABLES ix
LIST OF FIGURES xi
LIST OF APPENDICES xii
1 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Background 1
1.2 Importance of Study 5
1.3 Objective and Scope of Study 5
2 LITERATURE REVIEW 7
2.1 Source of Raw Sewage 7
2.2 Characteristic of Raw Sewage 8
2.2.1 Soluble and Insoluble Materials
10
2.2.2 Organic and Inorganic Materials 11
2.2.3 Suspended Solids 11
vii
2.2.4 Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) 11
2.2.5 Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) 12
2.2.6 Interrelationships between BOD and COD 12
2.2.7 Contaminants of Concern in Sewage Treatment 13
2.3 Flow Rate of Domestic Wastewater 14
2.4 Wastewater collection 17
2.4.1 Sewer line 17
2.4.2 Pumping Stations 18
2.5 Wastewater Treatment Processes 18
2.5.1 Preliminary Treatment 19
2.5.2 Equalization or Balancing Tank 20
2.5.3 Primary Treatment 21
2.5.4 Biological or Secondary Treatment 21
2.5.5 Final Clarifier or Sedimentation Tank 23
2.5.6 Sludge Treatment 23
2.5.7 Flow Measurement 23
2.6 Energy Utilization 24
2.7 Extended Aeration System 24
2.7.1 Description of Extended Aeration Process 26
2.7.2 Prefabricated Reinforce Fiberglass Extended Aeration 27
2.7.3 Cast In-Situ Extended Aeration 27
3 METHODOLOGY 28
REFERENCES 48
Appendices A - C 50-71
ix
LIST OF TABLES
LIST OF FIGURES
LIST OF APPENDICES
APPENDIX TITLE
PAGE
A Sampling Results 50
B Photograph of Treatment Plant 59
D Flow Measurement Data 64
1
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
The most important goal of the National Sewerage Policy is to ensure that the
discarded water after it has been used is properly treated before being discharged in
order to protect the receiving environment. The evolution of fully mechanized
sewage treatment processes from primitive to primary and continued progress headed
to secondary treatment system will help us save our environment from degradation.
This trend created new and modern equipments ranging from pumps, screens,
aeration systems, sludge process systems and other technological advancement
equipments which continuously help us to reduce pollutants entering our water
systems.
The second most important goal of the National sewerage Policy is to manage
the required wastewater treatment plants as cost effective as possible as the cost of
the sewerage systems operation is being bore by the tax payer, an effective system is
essential as to save money of the tax payer or the public as a whole. With many
treatment systems currently available in the market today, proper selection of the
systems is crucial and many factors need to be considered which include cost of
construction, operation and maintenance, and performance of the systems.
The required area does not include any buffer zone surrounding each plant.
Appropriate setbacks and access paths within the plant have been included.
5
1.2 Importance of Study
The main objective of this study was to compare and contrast two most
commonly used extended aeration systems for small to medium size sewage
treatment plants namely prefabricated reinforced fiberglass and concrete in-situ
systems.
6
This study was limited to the extended aeration systems of prefabricated fiber
reinforced glass and cast in-situ plants of the same PE size ranging from 1,000
3,500 PE which were currently under the operation of IWK, Terengganu. The
comparisons were based on the operational cost of the system, particularly the energy
cost, the efficiency of the process and the ease of operation of the systems.
7
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
Usage, Percent
Wash basin 11
Kitchen 9a
Drinking (2-6%)
Dishwashing (3-5%)
Source: [5]
Concentration ( mg/l )
No. Parameter
Strong Medium Weak
1 Solids, Total 1,200 720 350
Dissolved, Total 850 500 250
2 Fixed 525 300 145
Volatile 325 200 105
Suspended, total 350 220 100
3 Fixed 75 55 20
Volatile 275 165 80
4 Settle able solids, ml/l 20* 10* 5*
Biochemical oxygen
5 400 250 110
demand, 5-day, 20 C
6
Total organic carbon (TOC) 290 160 80
Typical values for BOD/COD are shown in table 2.3. For raw sewage any
value greater than 0.5, the waste can be easily removed by biological processes and if
the ratio below about 0.3, raw sewage may have some toxic components or
acclimated microorganisms may be required in the stabilization [6].
Source: [6]
13
2.2.7 Contaminants of Concern in Sewage Treatment.
Other than BOD and COD, pollutants normally measured and their concern
in sewage treatment plants are shown in Table 2.4 [3].
Source: [3]
14
2.3 Flow Rate of Domestic Wastewater
In the design of sewer line and treatment plant, the sizing is to be based on
the hydraulic loading. This is done through the population equivalent (PE) as shown
in Table 2.5 [3]. In Malaysia one population equivalent is equal to 225 l/c/d of
sewage discharge to the sewer line or treatment plant.
Schools/Educational Institutions:
- Day schools/Institutions 0.2 per student
- Fully residential 1 per student
- Partial residential 0.2 per non-residential student
1 per residential student
Hospitals 4 per bed
Hotels with dining and laundry facilities 4 per room
Factories, excluding process water 0.3 per staff
Market (wet type) 3 per stall
Market (dry type) 1 per stall
Petrol kiosks/Service stations 15 per toilet
Bus terminal 4 per bus bay
Taxi terminal 4 per taxi bay
Mosque 0.2 per person
Church/Temple 0.2 per person
Stadium 0.2 per person
Swimming pool/ Sport complex 0.5 per person
Public toilet 15 per toilet
Airport 0.2 per passenger bay
0.3 per machine
Laundry 10 per machine
Prison 1 per person
Golf course 20 per hole
Source: [3]
15
The rate of flow varies within 24 hours of the days. In residential area, the
flow rate is lowest in the early morning, while the high values are normally observed
in the periods from 6 am to 8 am and 6 pm to 8 pm. Flow from industrial,
institutional and commercial areas are mostly during daylight hours. Typical
variation in municipal water demand and wastewater flow is shown in Figure 2.1 [5]
and the relationship between wastewater and water usage is ranging from 60 to
130%.
Figure 2.1: Typical variation in municipal water demand and waster water flow [5]
16
The ratios of extreme flows to average daily flow of wastewater are shown in
Figure 2.2 [5]. The higher water usage will normally reduced the contaminations
concentration due to the dilution factor and reduced the septicity or anaerobically
degraded of the raw sewage which leads to the release of hydrogen sulfide and other
odors and gives a better effluent result.
Figure 2.2: Ratios of extreme flow to average daily flow (peaking factor) for
municipal wastewater under dry weather conditions [5]
17
2.4 Wastewater Collection System
With the advancement of technology, new pipe materials are periodically being
offered for use in sanitary sewer constructions. The types of conduit or pipe
normally used in sewer construction today are shown in Table 2.6 [7].
Source: [7]
18
Manholes are provided at certain locations to provide access from the ground
surface to sewer line for the purpose of inspection, repair and clearing blockages.
Inverted siphons are normally used when sewage need to pass below any
obstructions.
Pumping station is used when it is more economical for passing sewage from
low area over high ground than a tunneled gravity main. The pump sump storage
capacity is designed by avoiding excess accumulation of sludge, nuisance from odors
and septicity of the raw sewage. A standby pump is normally provided so that any
one of the pumps can be taken out for services.
Inlet pump stations must be provided by primary screens to protect the pumps
from being damage or clogged and must be equipped with sewerage application
pumps.
Figure 2.3 gives an overview of the typical flow diagram and elements of a
sewage treatment plants. It clearly can be seemed that one facility is closely related
to another and thus has an impact upon the overall design and must be designed to
produce an effluent quality as under provisions of the Environmental Quality Act
1974 (EQA) [3].
19
Source: [3]
Figure 2.3: Typical elements and process flow diagram of a sewage treatment plant.
The screen in the pump sump is to remove large solids and the fine screen
provided after the pumping processes, will remove the smaller solids which pass
through the first screen. The screenings bar must be cleaned to avoid clogging,
either manually or by electrical driven raking devices. The removal of large solids
and grid is necessary to avoid the damage of the equipment downstream and reduce
the interference within plants flow and performance.
Typical process application for fixed film and suspended growth biological
processes are as shown in Table 2.8. In recent years, a number of hybrids systems,
which incorporate elements of both fixed film and suspended growth systems, have
also been developed [6].
Table 2.8: Major biological treatment processes used for wastewater treatment.
Type Common Name Use
Suspended Activated-sludge process(es) Carbonaceous BOD removal, nitrification
growth Aerated lagoons Carbonaceous BOD removal, nitrification
Aerobic digestion Stabilization, Carbonaceous BOD
removal
Attached Trickling filters Carbonaceous BOD removal, nitrification
growth Rotating biological contactors Carbonaceous BOD removal, nitrification
Packed-bed reactors Carbonaceous BOD removal, nitrification
The extended aeration system is the most popular treatment system currently
being employed in Malaysia particularly for small to medium size population. The
extended aeration system in Malaysia normally consists of three types of tanks.
They are aeration tank, clarifier and sludge digestion tank. While preliminary
treatment such as screening and grit removal is available, primary sedimentation tank
is normally not provided. As mentioned earlier, two types of systems normally used
are prefabricated reinforced fiberglass and concrete cast in-situ. Figures 2.4 and 2.5
illustrate the layout of the systems. The design parameter for extended aeration is
shown in Table 2.9 [9].
25
Fine
Screen Control Box
Coarse Clarifier
Sewage Screen
Equalization Aeration
Effluent
Tank Tank
RAS
Scum
Sludge
Overflow HoldingTank WAS
Screen Activated
Raw Screened Sludge
Sewage Sewage AerationUnit
Discharge
Final Effluent
ReturnedActivatedSludge
Rankingfor Sludgefor
Disposal Disposal
Cu is underflow
concentration
RAS pump rating Hours/day 24
Recirculation ratio, QRAS/QINFLOW 0.5-1.0
Aerator loading Kg/ m/d 0.1-0.4
Minimum mixing requirement W/ m 20
Source: [3]
CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY
At present, there are more than 250 treatment plants operating in the state of
Terengganu. Therefore, the initial stage of the study is to identify the suitable
wastewater treatment plants to be used. In order to obtain a good comparison
between the systems, one of the main criteria being considered was the value of the
PE; the treatment plants PE should be between 1,000 and 3,500. Additionally,
only plants having an average compliance to Environmental Quality Act (EQA),
1974 requirement of 100% in 2006 were selected. It was also assumed that majority
of the equipments in the plants were in full operation and being operated and
maintained within the acceptable requirement. The selected treatment plants were
under the jurisdiction of IWK Terengganu and as no water intake point was involved,
the plants were only required to comply with the Standard B of the EQA. The
selection of the plant was not confine to the plants of the same area but cover a few
districts within the state of Terengganu.
The performance of the treatment plants were assessed based on water quality
parameters (i.e. BOD, COD, and SS), and electricity cost. Samples and data were
collected for the period of October 2006 to March 2007. Sampling, preservation and
29
analysis were conducted according to the Standard Methods [11] by IWK Central
Laboratory, Kuala Lumpur.
During the study period, primary sampling results and flow measurement
were monitored and analyzed. Adjustments were also made to electrical and
mechanical equipments such as raw sewage, WAS and RAS pumps, aeration devices
and pumping systems that are related to electricity cost and the overall performance
of the treatment plants.
30
CHAPTER 4
Table 4.1 shows the list of the extended aeration treatment plants used in the
study. The selection of these plants was based on secondary data made available by
IWK Terengganu and located in the districts of Kuala Terengganu, Dungun and
Kemaman. Based on IWK, all treatment plant approved and constructed before 1999
is categorized as category 3 while treatment plant approved and constructed after
1999 is categorized as category 2. The prefabricated treatment plants were of Hi-
Kleen type. The general view of the selected treatment plants are shown in
Appendix B.
31
Table 4.1: List of selected extended aeration treatment plants used in the study
Prefabricated system
Low /
Murni Perdana,
1 TDN021 3260 3 medium
Dungun
cost
Low /
Permint Perdana,
2 KTU095 2230 2 medium
K.Trg.
cost
Medium /
4 KTU082 Sri Kolam, K.Trg. 2130 3
Low Apt
Low /
1 TDN025 Rakyat Jaya, Dungun 3155 2 medium
cost
Low /
2 TKN044 Semarak, Kemaman 2262 2 medium
cost
The plants are categorized according to the new interim Standard B interim
limit as shown in Table 4.2 [3].
32
The duration of the flow measurement on the selected treatment plants were
conducted between three to five days period and the overall results are shown in the
Appendix C.
Due to time constraint only five flow measurements were completed, but it
anticipated not affecting the reliability of the overall result discussion in principle as
it represented all the PE range and location of the selected sewage treatment plants.
All the selected treatment plants were built based on maximum design PE. From the
data obtained, it was observed that the flow of raw sewage entering the treatment
plants were 28.78% to 47.18% of the design average flow as shown in the Table 4.3.
33
Table 4.3: Flow measurement results
MOBILE FLOW
MEASUREMENT % Actual
Design Design Peak ADWF
ADWF
PE ADWF Peak WF WF Cal. ADWF
(m/d)
(m/d) (m/d) (m/d)
1 KTU082 2130 479 2073 226 1178 47.18%
2 KTU095 2230 502 2159 221 1160 44.02%
3 TDN025 3155 785 3217 226 944 28.78%
4 KTU084 1086 244 1138 109 549 44.67%
5 TKN044 2262 456 2016 168 1020 36.84%
Lower values of raw sewage flow entering treatment plant always coincide
with the increase of travel time or longer idling period in the pump sumps and more
anaerobic conditions developed. Normally the color of the raw sewage changes
sequentially form gray to dark gray, and ultimately to black, indicating the septicity
of the raw sewage reaching biological processes stage. Consequently odor is
produced by anaerobic microorganisms that reduce sulfate to sulfide and forming
hydrogen sulfide gas [6].
Due to time constraint, only 6 raw sewages from four treatment plant were
sampled. It anticipated not affecting the reliability of the overall result discussion in
principle as it represented a combination of low to medium cost houses, low to
medium cost apartments and medium cost apartment. The overall sampling results
are shown in Appendix A.
34
The characteristics of the raw sewage are given in Table 4.4. The values of
BOD during the sampling period ranged from 52 to 549 mg/l (classification range
from very weak to a very strong raw sewage) with an average of 252 mg/l. The
values of COD ranged from 136 to 1163 mg/l (classification from very weak to a
very strong domestic sewage) with an average of 551 mg/l.. The concentration of SS
ranged from 69 to 394 mg/l (classification range from very weak to very strong raw
sewage) with an average value of 187 mg/l. The average values of BOD and COD
were higher than medium concentration of typical untreated domestic sewage.
The higher value of BOD appeared to occur at the same time with the value of
COD. The relationship between the BOD and COD values is shown in Figure 4.1
with an R-squared value of 0.9726. The higher value of BOD also appeared to occur
35
at the same time with the value of SS. As shown in Figure 4.2, the BOD and SS
values show a good relationship with R-squared value of 0.973. Similarly, as shown
in Figure 4.3, the higher value of COD appeared to occur about at the same time with
the value of SS. This indicates the possible significant contribution of the organic
content originating from the suspended solids in the wastewater.
1400
1200
y = 1.8398x + 87.657
1000
R2 = 0.9726
COD (mg/l)
800
600
400
200
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
BOD (m g/l)
600
300
200
100
0
0 100 200 300 400 500
Suspended Solids (mg/l)
1400
y = 2.9177x - 4.0173
1200
R2 = 0.9719
1000
Based on Table 4.5, the ratio of BOD/COD ranged from 0.38 to 0.55
indicating that the waste is treatable by biological processes. It can also be assumed
that no toxic components were presence in the raw sewage.
During the study period, 23 effluent samples were taken from prefabricated
treatment plants while 19 effluent samples were taken from cast in-situ treatment
plants. The overall sampling results are shown in appendix A.
The BOD effluent as shown in Table 4.6, ranged from 6 to 106 mg/l (average
of 28.98 mg/l) for prefabricated treatment plants as compared to 7 to 116 mg/l
(average 27.45 mg/l) for cast in-situ treatment plants. On average, the latter shows a
better effluent quality with a difference of about 18%.
Table 4.6: Average effluent BOD of prefabricated and cast in-situ plants (in mg/l)
Overall
28.98 27.45
Average
As shown in Table 4.7, the effluent COD for prefabricated plant ranged from
26 to 296.0 mg/l with an average of 104 mg/l. The COD for cast in-situ ranged from
46 to 161 mg/l with an average of about 100 mg/l. On average, the latter gave a
better effluent COD quality. The smallest plant, served only medium cost residential
type, KTU 084 of fabricated plant and TKN 019 of cast in-situ plants seems to give
better effluent BOD and COD than any other plants.
38
Table 4.7: Average effluent COD of prefabricated and cast in-situ plants (in mg/l)
The higher values of COD appear to occur at the same time with the values of
BOD for prefabricated treatment plants as shown in Figure 4.4. The R square value
of the relationship is 0.9961 and is given by
160
140
y = 2.8595x + 21.13
120
R2 = 0.9961
COD (mg/l)
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 10 20 30 40 50
BOD (mg/l)
Figure 4.4: Relationship between BOD and COD for final effluent (prefabricated
plants)
39
Similarly, the higher values of COD appear to occur at the same time with the
values of BOD for cast in-situ treatment plants as shown in Figure 4.5. The R square
value of the relationship is 0.9693 and is given by
160
140 y = 2.613x + 28.983
120
COD (mg/l)
2
R = 0.9693
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 10 20 30 40 50
BOD (mg/l)
Figure 4.5: Relationship between BOD and COD for final effluent (Cast In-situ)
The overall average of BOD/COD ranged from 0.15 to 0.44 for prefabricated
plants and 0.15 to 0.38 for cast in-situ plants as shown in Table 4.8. As discussed in
section 2.2.6, the theoretical values of treated effluent are ranging from 0.1 to 0.3 for
treated or final effluent and 0.4 to 0.6 values for after primary settling processes.
The value of 0.44 was happened in the month of October, 2006 for KTU 095 and
during this time, the plant (prefabricated) has failed to meet the effluent standard
requirement. In another words, if the ratio of BOD/COD of treated effluent is greater
than 0.4, it indicate the untreatable nature of the sewage. Longer hydraulic retention
time for aeration is therefore required.
40
Table 4.8: BOD/COD ratio values for final effluent
Prefabricated Plant Cast In-Situ Plant
No Month
TDN021 KTU095 KTU084 TDN025 TKN044 TKN019
1 Okt06 0.26 0.44 0.17 0.30 0.29 0.19
2 Nov06 0.36 0.15 0.16 0.38 0.33 -
3 Dec06 0.31 0.30 - 0.29 0.28 -
4 Jan07 0.39 0.25 0.23 0.19 0.26 0.15
5 Feb07 0.23 0.16 0.15 - 0.29 0.19
Average 0.31 0.23 0.18 0.29 0.29 0.18
Overall
0.24 0.25
Average
For SS removal as shown in Table 4.9, the prefabricated plants were found to
give better effluent than the cast in-situ plants. The average effluent SS of the former
was 37.08 mg/l while the latter was 42.14 mg/l. The SS of the effluent for
prefabricated plants and cast in-situ plants ranged from 4 to 105 mg/l and 10 to
74 mg/l. For an unknown reason (other than medium cost residential type), the
effluent SS for KTU084 (prefabricated plant) was extremely low (i.e. between 4 to 9
mg/l).
Table 4.9: Average effluent SS of prefabricated and cast in-situ plants (in mg/l)
% of Compliance
No. Plant Type BOD COD SS
1 Prefabricated Plants 85.7 92.8 92.8
2 Cast In-Situ Plants 100.0 100.0 100.0
Based on IWK Terengganu, the average effluent BOD, COD and SS for 2006
is shown in Table 4.11. For BOD and SS removal, it clearly shown that the cast in-
situ plants were found to give better effluent than the prefabricated plants. For SS
removal, both plants achieved the same average.
The electricity cost of the treatment plants are shown in Table 4.12. For
prefabricated plants, the cost per month ranged from RM 546 to RM 2975 while for
cast in-situ plants, costs are in the range of RM 149 to RM 2161. On average, the
cost per PE for cast in-situ plants (i.e. RM 0.49/PE) is lower than the cost for
prefabricated plants (i.e. RM 0.74/PE). Higher electricity cost for prefabricated plant
could be resulted from the use of air-lift systems for RAS, WAS, and aerator in the
equalization tanks which run concurrently by using the same pumps systems with the
blower in the aeration tanks. This definitely required bigger pumps size and an extra
pumps are also needed in the equalization tanks.
43
Table 4.12: Electricity cost (RM) of the treatment plants
It was also observed that the electricity cost of the plants does not necessarily
have direct relationship with the aeration period. As shown in Tables 4.13 and 4.14,
there were many occasions where higher costs of electricity were incurred despite the
use of lower aeration period. It is possible that for a small sewage treatment plant,
other costs such as raw sewage pumps also play a major part in determining the total
electricity cost. As mentioned earlier in section 2.6, that it is difficult to determine
how energy utilization is divided among the consumer within the wastewater
treatment plants. Sometimes all the pumps within treatment plants can represent as
much as 90% of the total energy consumption [8].
44
Table 4.13: Overall electricity cost as a function of aeration time for Prefabricated
Plants
Table 4.14: Overall electricity cost as a function of aeration time for Cast In-Situ
Plants
Based on IWK Terengganu, the electricity cost of the treatment plants were
shown in Table 4.15. For prefabricated plants, the average cost/PE (i.e. RM 0.75/PE)
is higher than the cost for cast in-situ plants (i.e. RM 0.44/PE)
45
Table 4.15: Electricity Cost (RM) for 2006
Prefabricated plant Cast in-situ plant
TDN021 KTU095 KTU084 TDN025 TKN044 TKN019
(PE 3260) (PE 2230) (PE 1086) (PE 3155) (PE 2262) (PE 1155)
2006 Cost 24,672.25 27.880.15 7452.94 20,520.98 14,503.18 5320.66
Cost/ Month 2,056.02 2,323.34 621.08 1,710.08 1,208.60 443.38
Cost/PE 0.63/PE 1.04/PE 0.57/PE 0.54/PE 0.53/PE 0.38/PE
Overall
RM 0.75 / PE RM 0.44 / PE
Cost/PE
Source: [1]
CHAPTER 5
Based on the results of this study, several conclusions could be made. They
are as follows:
The characteristics of the influent show linear relationship between the COD
BOD, and SS values
On average, the cast in-situ plants have better effluent quality as compared to
the prefabricated plants. The former also has better percentage of DOEs
Standard B compliance as compared to the latter
The Cast in-situ treatment plants are built better structurally and are more
durable than the prefabricated plants
The cast in-situ treatment plants consumed less energy or electricity cost as
compared prefabricated treatment plants.
47
The followings are the recommendations for future works from this study:
Further study will also provide better design values and other factors that
affect the overall performance of the sewerage system, not only to meet the
effluent standard but also in term of the economics and ease of operations
48
REFERENCE
[2] IWK (2007). Sewerage Local Plan for Pulau Redang, Terenggnau.
unpublished.
[3] Ministry of Housing and Local Government (1998). Guideline for Developer.
Vol.4. Kuala Lumpur: Digi Master Sdn. Bhd.
[4] Process Energy Services (2006). Energy Project for Water and Wastewater
Facilities. California: Project Profile.
[5] Qassim, S.R. (1999). Wastewater Treatment. Half Day Talk on Theory and
Design to IWK Staff. December 14. Lancaster, PA: Technomic Publishing Co.,
Inc, 20-33.
[6] Metcalf and Eddy (2004). Wastewater Engineering (Treatment and Reuse). 4th
ed. New York: McGraw Hill.
[7] Barnes, D., Bliss, P.J., Gould, B.W., and Vallentine, H.R. (1981). Water and
Wastewater Engineering System. Great Britain: Pitman Publishing Limited.
[10] IWK (1996). Training Course on Design of Small & Medium Treatment Works.
unpublished.
49
APPENDIX A
SAMPLING RESULTS
Company No. 211763-P MONTHLY ANALYTICAL REPORT
Central Laboratory Services
Loji Rawatan Kumbahan Sg. Besi
Lot 33519 Bukit Jalil
56000 Kuala Lumpur
Following tests were conducted according to standard methods published by American Public Health Association (APHA) 19th edition, 1995
BOD - APHA 5210 B & APHA 4500 - OG COD - APHA 5220 B Ammonia - APHA 4500-NH3F
pH - APHA 4500-H SS - APHA 2540 D
APPENDIX B
APPENDIX C