Modelling anaerobic co-digestion in Benchmark Simulation Model No. 2: Parameter estimation, substrate characterisation and plant-wide integration.

Anaerobic co-digestion is an emerging practice at wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) to improve the energy balance and integrate waste management. Modelling of co-digestion in a plant-wide WWTP model is a powerful tool to assess the impact of co-substrate selection and dose strategy on digester performance and plant-wide effects. A feasible procedure to characterise and fractionate co-substrates COD for the Benchmark Simulation Model No. 2 (BSM2) was developed. This procedure is also applicable for the Anaerobic Digestion Model No. 1 (ADM1). Long chain fatty acid inhibition was included in the ADM1 model to allow for realistic modelling of lipid rich co-substrates. Sensitivity analysis revealed that, apart from the biodegradable fraction of COD, protein and lipid fractions are the most important fractions for methane production and digester stability, with at least two major failure modes identified through principal component analysis (PCA). The model and procedure were tested on bio-methane potential (BMP) tests on three substrates, each rich on carbohydrates, proteins or lipids with good predictive capability in all three cases. This model was then applied to a plant-wide simulation study which confirmed the positive effects of co-digestion on methane production and total operational cost. Simulations also revealed the importance of limiting the protein load to the anaerobic digester to avoid ammonia inhibition in the digester and overloading of the nitrogen removal processes in the water train. In contrast, the digester can treat relatively high loads of lipid rich substrates without prolonged disturbances.

Efficiency of an emissions payment system for nitrogen in sewage treatment plants - a case study.

An emissions payment system for nitrogen in Swedish sewage treatment plants (STPs) was evaluated using a semi-empirical approach. The system was based on a tariff levied on each unit of nitrogen emitted by STPs, and profitable measures to reduce nitrogen emissions were identified for twenty municipal STPs. This was done through direct involvement with the plant personnel and the results were scaled up to cover all treatment plants larger than 2000 person equivalents in the Swedish tributary areas of the Kattegat and the Baltic Proper. The sum of costs and nitrogen reductions were compared with an assumed command-and-control regulation requiring all STPs to obtain 80% total nitrogen reduction in their effluents. Costs for the latter case were estimated using a database containing standard estimates for reduction costs by six specified measures. For both cases a total reduction target of 3000 tonnes of nitrogen was set. We did not find that the emissions payment system was more efficient in terms of total reduction costs, although some practical and administrative advantages could be identified. Our results emphasize the need to evaluate the performance of policy instruments on a case-by-case basis since the theoretical efficiency is not always reflected in practice.