Lycke, Derek

Derek Lycke is a Senior Process Engineer at Jacobs with more than 25 years of experience working with resource recovery and clean energy technologies.

Titles from this speaker

Description: Ann Arbor Tackles Stringent Effluent Phosphorus Limits with a Cost-Effective...

Ann Arbor Tackles Stringent Effluent Phosphorus Limits with a Cost-Effective Side-Stream Phosphorus Removal Solution

Abstract

BACKGROUND The Ann Arbor WRRF is a 29.5 MGD advanced secondary treatment wastewater facility owned and operated by the City of Ann Arbor, MI. The liquids treatment includes headworks, primary clarification, enhanced biological phosphorus removal (EBPR) , nitrification, final clarification, granular media filtration, and UV disinfection prior to discharge to the Huron River. The solids treatment has been dependent upon the ability to land apply the biosolids for nearly half of the year. During this period, primary sludge (PS) was thickened using gravity thickeners and waste activated sludge (WAS) was thickened by a gravity belt thickener (GBT). Together thickened PS (TPS) and thickened WAS (TWAS) were combined and the biosolids were lime stabilized prior to hauling to local fields. During the rest of the year, when land application was not possible, PS and TWAS were combined in holding tanks before being dewatered by centrifuges. Centrate from the centrifuges was returned to the plant influent, and the dewatered biosolids were hauled to a landfill for disposal. Combining PS and TWAS without the addition of lime, caused phosphate removed by the EBPR process to release into solution and concentrate in the dewatering centrate. For these months, this returned phosphate load reduced the efficiency of the EBPR process, and ultimately increased the effluent Total Phosphorus (TP) concentrations. Ann Arbor is facing challenges associated with increasingly stringent National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit limits for effluent phosphorus, with May to December effluent loadings limits reduced from 200 to 50 - 60 lbs total phosphorus (TP)/d. In addition, land application has become more difficult (i.e., farm field availability, transportation issues) causing Ann Arbor to dewater and landfill solids year-round until a longer term biosolids management strategy is developed. To consistently meet the new NPDES permit limits for phosphorus, the City of Ann Arbor engaged a team of consulting engineers to study options for treatment of the high phosphorus centrate side stream resulting from centrifuge dewatering of WRRF sludge. METHODOLOGY The first task in this study was to develop a whole plant process model, which was used to understand the impacts of centrate phosphate loading and evaluate the efficacy of possible mitigation approaches. The project team then identified four alternatives to be considered for mitigation of centrate phosphate loading concerns: 1.Segregated and aerated storage of WAS to prevent phosphorus release. 2.Lime addition to sludge holding tanks to precipitate phosphorus prior to dewatering. 3.Phosphate recovery from the dewatering centrate. 4.Chemically enhanced primary treatment (CEPT) to minimize secondary phosphorus loading. The alternatives were evaluated based on:

*Ability to meet the NPDES limit for TP loading

*Capital and operating costs

*Ease of implementation and operation

*Secondary impacts to plant processes, such as EBPR Following evaluation, bench scale testing was performed for preferred alternatives to validate modeling results and examine operational feasibility. This resulted in one preferred alternative being implemented and optimized at full scale. FINDINGS Simulation results from the whole plant model (Figure 1) demonstrate Alternatives 1, 2 and 4 show the most promise in meeting the strictest year-round final effluent TP load (50 lb/d). Cost analysis, however, showed that the chemical demand associated with Alternative 4 would add nearly $2 million in annual operating cost for Ann Arbor, whereas Alternatives 1 and 2 could be implemented with the fewest operational and infrastructure changes. These alternatives also presented no negative impacts on other plant operations (e.g. EBPR). Benchtop testing for Alternative 1 (Figure 2) demonstrated that it is unlikely that aged PS and aerated TWAS could be mixed for more than a few minutes without releasing more than 20% of the stored phosphate into the centrate stream. Testing observations also identified potential full-scale difficulties with aerating TWAS. Testing for Alternative 2 (Figure 3) predicted a lime dosing rate of 2.3% (18% lime slurry) would provide 90% PO4-P removal in the centrate. Based on this analysis, Alternative 2 — Lime addition to sludge holding tanks, was implemented at the full scale using existing assets in 2023, one year ahead of permit limit reductions taking effect. The plant has met their new NPDES limits (Figure 4) and has been able to optimize the lime dosing operation. Since the initial lime dosing rate of 2.3% was exceeding the targets of 90% PO4-P removal in the centrate (Figure 5), systematic reductions in dosing rate to 1.6% have been completed, resulting in a final sidestream PO4-P removal cost of less than $0.25/lb TP. Under the lower dosing rates, targeted PO4-P removal and daily plant effluent TP limits are still being met on an average basis, however, there is increased variability in daily centrate PO4-P removal rates. This variability has been linked to the final centrate pH, which is thought to be primarily influenced by pre-liming sludge age. The City and its team of consulting engineers is currently investigating and optimizing the sludge holding and lime dosing strategy to reduce this variability. Findings from this optimization will also be included in the final paper.

Ann Arbor and their team of consulting engineers reviewed several sidestream treatment options to treat a high phosphate concentration centrate stream that was impeding the plant's ability to meet new NPDES limits. The team has implemented lime dosing in the sludge stream upstream of the centrifuge, reducing phosphate return loads by over 90%, and allowing the city to meet their permit.

SpeakerLycke, Derek

Presentation time

14:30:00

15:00:00

Session time

13:30:00

15:00:00

SessionInnovations in Phosphorus Management: From Models to Solutions

Session number603

Session locationRoom 340

TopicFacility Operations and Maintenance, Intermediate Level, Municipal Wastewater Treatment Design, Nutrients, Research and Innovation

Author(s)

Lycke, Derek, Stewart, Heather, Li, Mengfei, Fitzgerald, Colin, Gelderloos, Allen, Drinan, Jennifer, Sanders, Keith, Jaworski, Nicholas

Author(s)D. Lycke1, H.A. Stewart2, M. Li3, C.M. Fitzgerald4, A.B. Gelderloos5, J.B. Drinan6, K.E. Sanders7, N. Jaworski8

Author affiliation(s)1Jacobs, BC, 2Jacobs, PA, 3Jacobs Engineering Group, MI, 4Jacobs, CO, 5Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc., MI, 6OHM, MI, 7City of Ann Arbor WWTP, MI, 8, MI

SourceProceedings of the Water Environment Federation

Document typeConference Paper

PublisherWater Environment Federation

Print publication date Oct 2024

DOI10.2175/193864718825159589

Volume / Issue

Content sourceWEFTEC

Word count15

Hydrothermal Liquefaction: Technical Risks and Mitigation

Abstract

Objective Metro Vancouver is building a continuous flow hydrothermal liquefaction (HTL) demonstration facility using wastewater sludge as its feedstock. HTL operates at subcritical temperature and pressure to convert wet biomass into biocrude oil in minutes. Biocrude is then refined to produce low-carbon transportation fuels. As this will be the first HTL system in North America at an operating wastewater treatment plant (WWTP), it is paramount to address risks including:

*Technical safety: the process operates at high temperature and high pressure not typical for municipal wastewater treatment.

*Design risks: odour control and dispersion, fire protection, and design integration risks.

*Regulatory risks and permitting: oil and gas technical regulations typically do not apply to biocrude as it is an emerging product.

*Operational and business risks: viability of HTL at a WWTP depends on sludge feedstock variability and resulting biocrude yield and quality, and low-cost options for byproduct beneficial use or disposal. Status The project team consists of an HTL technology licensee, HTL equipment supplier (Inside-Battery Limits designer/fabricator) and an engineering consultant serving as Owner's Engineer and Outside-Battery-Limits designer. A risk assessment consultant undertook a Qualitative Risk Analysis (QRA). Design is complete with fabrication scheduled to start Q1 2024, on-site construction in Q4 2024, and operation in Q4 2025. Project partner Parkland Refinery will co-process the biocrude. Methodology The project used a continuous improvement approach that assesses and mitigates risk throughout the design process, via:

*3 stages of Hazard and Operability (HAZOP) reviews in preliminary and detailed designs

*2 stages of QRA of toxicity and flammability dispersion

*Detailed design risk assessments of odour control and dispersion, and fire protection

*Intensive project-wide risk assessment workshops and continuous review and update of risk log

*Detailed characterization of biocrude and aqueous and solid byproducts from processing of sludge in bench-top and mobile HTL units

*Developing beneficial use and disposal options for biocrude/byproducts

*Third-party operation by specifically skilled operators Findings The risk assessment workshops highlighted these top-ranked risks:

*High temperature and high pressure process: need to develop equipment applications, operational procedures, PPE, training, and emergency response plans for safe operation.

*Concurrent engineering: multiple interfaces being designed in parallel that can create risk of interface issues if not carefully managed.

*Experimental technology: HTL of wastewater sludge has not been proven at this scale. Limited information is available on process stream characterization and equipment testing in similar conditions.

*Impacts to WWTP: the HTL plant will return streams to the WWTP, which is located beside the WWTP and warehouses, and produces flammable and toxic substances. Abnormal releases or spills could present risks to WWTP operation and human health. The second stage of QRA took into consideration the volume of products and lower potential for run-away reactions based on more accurate product characterization in order to optimize the results obtained by the first stage QRA that has used more conservative assumptions and inputs. The updated QRA showed a significant reduction in dispersion radius for both toxicity and flammability impacts, with all risk contours (location specific individual risk) contained within site and a probability of 0.3 fatalities in 1 million years. This is considered extremely low according to MIACC guidelines as shown in Figure 2. Mitigation of risks during design will be discussed in this paper:

*Design changes to feedstock preparation and delivery (pressure regulation, heat exchanger technology)

*Corrosion assessment plan was developed to use tokens and targeted sampling during operation.

*Bench-scale HTL by academic partner produced biocrude and byproducts for characterization.

*analogous sludge was sourced for processing in mobile HTL unit by technology licensee, providing biocrude for evaluation by refinery partner.

*Feedstock, biocrude and byproduct characterization methods were developed.

*Laboratories that conduct testing across both municipal wastewater treatment and hydrocarbon sectors were identified.

*Aqueous byproduct characterization identified potential issues with loading (Table 1) and toxicity (Figure 3) that could prevent return of the stream to the WWTP.

*UBC researchers screened physical, aerobic, and anaerobic methods for treatment of aqueous byproduct.

*Due to high disposal cost for the aqueous byproduct, pretreatment may be favored to remove visible oils, odour, nitrogen (ammonia) and carbon to allow the stream to be returned to the WWTP.

*Identifying disposal and beneficial use options for solid byproduct prompted changes to solid byproduct handling, required further byproduct characterization and navigating permits at local landfill and waste-to-energy facility (Table 2).

*Biocrude and byproduct management plans influenced storage and transportation design. Significance HTL is a promising solution for wastewater utilities seeking alternatives for biosolids management. Lessons learned from design and operation of this demonstration will inform scale-up of HTL with wastewater sludge, improving the probability of success in future

Metro Vancouver is building a continuous flow hydrothermal liquefaction (HTL) demonstration facility using wastewater sludge feedstock. HTL operates at subcritical temperature and pressure to convert wet biomass into biocrude oil in minutes. Biocrude is then refined to produce low-carbon transportation fuels. As this will be the first HTL system in North America at an operating wastewater treatment plant (WWTP), it is paramount to address risks.

SpeakerCotter, Lucy

Presentation time

14:30:00

14:50:00

Session time

13:30:00

15:00:00

SessionDevelopments in Hydrothermal Liquefaction for WRRFs

Session number401

Session locationRoom 256

TopicBiosolids and Residuals, Circular Water Economy, Energy Production, Conservation, and Management, Intermediate Level, Research and Innovation

Author(s)

Cotter, Lucy, Lycke, Derek, Richards, Shantell, Wong, Stephenie, Farinelli, Zeno, Eskicioglu, Cigdem, Zaremba, Lillian, Archer, Gregg, Blair, David, Taponat, Marie, Li, Huipeng, Roxburgh, Ruth

Author(s)L. Cotter1, D. Lycke2, S.M. Richards3, S. Wong2, Z. Farinelli4, C. Eskicioglu5, L. Zaremba6, G. Archer7, D. Blair6, M. Taponat8, H. Li9, R. Roxburgh1

Author affiliation(s)1Jacobs, British Columbia, 2Jacobs, BC, 3Jacobs Engineering, BC, 4Metro Vancouver Reg'L Dist, BC, 5University of British Columbia Okanagan, DC, 6Metro Vancouver, BC, 7Metro Vancouver, British Columbia, 8, BC, 9Jacobs

SourceProceedings of the Water Environment Federation

Document typeConference Paper

PublisherWater Environment Federation

Print publication date Oct 2024

DOI10.2175/193864718825159541

Volume / Issue

Content sourceWEFTEC

Word count7

Description: Innovation and Business Case for Hydrothermal Liquefaction as a Solids Management...

Innovation and Business Case for Hydrothermal Liquefaction as a Solids Management Solution

Abstract

Introduction Metro Vancouver (MV) is facing a tripling of sludge production by 2050 due to wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) upgrades and population growth. To address that challenge, MV needs to diversify its solids management options and is considering Hydrothermal Liquefaction (HTL) as a potential alternative to complement land application. HTL uses temperature and pressure to convert wet biomass into biocrude, which is then refined into low-carbon transportation fuels. HTL of wastewater solids leverages existing infrastructure to aggregate organic feedstock and create biofuels (Figure 1). While HTL of municipal sewage sludge has been proven successfully at bench scale (Marrone et al., 2018; Liu et al., 2022 & 2023), larger scale HTL has only been proven with other feedstocks. MV is building a continuous flow HTL demonstration facility that uses wastewater sludge as its feedstock in British Columbia (BC), Canada (Figure 2). It will process 2 dry tonnes/day of undigested primary and secondary sludge, targeting 7,500 hours of cumulative and 1,000 hours of continuous operation. Design is complete and operation will begin in 2026. Project partner Parkland Refinery will co-process the biocrude. Data from the demonstration will be used to refine the business case, evaluate the technical and financial viability of HTL as an alternative for solids management, and inform the decision to implement HTL at full-scale. ...Innovation Through the design and fabrication phase of the MV HTL demonstration project, the design teams have resolved multiple data gaps to scale up from bench-scale testing, including: - Treatment options for the aqueous effluent byproduct - Byproduct re-use and disposal options, characterization and application of waste disposal regulatory requirements - Characterization of odorous air streams and treatment options - Characterization of biocrude product and -Fire protection design requirements, risk assessment, and refinement Recent work published by PNNL on the effects and fate of PFAS compounds will also be incorporated into the testing plan for the MV HTL demonstration facility (Olarte 2024). ...Business Case Seiple et al. (2020) have shown that wastewater sludge can be a cost-effective feedstock for transportation biofuels using HTL. MV's decision to build the demonstration facility was based on the business case for full-scale HTL compared to business-as-usual (BAU) of new digesters and biosolids land application. However, with many knowledge gaps in using HTL at WWTPs, mainly around managing the HTL aqueous and solid byproducts, MV took a conservative approach for the business case. - The BAU scenario used optimistic assumptions: --Biosolids management costs stay the same as present, whereas availability of land application sites may decline due to changing public perception and regulatory restrictions, which could lead to disposal with 15% higher cost. --Inflation stays at 2% for land application costs, vs. a more realistic 4%. - The HTL scenario used conservative assumptions: --Biocrude yield at low end of published range, resulting in less revenue. --Biocrude is sold at a discount compared to fossil crude, due to difference in attributes. --HTL aqueous byproduct is treated by catalytic hydrothermal gasification (CHG), which is effective but costly. MV is investigating other less costly processes to treat or valorize the aqueous byproduct, which were not considered in the business case. Data from the demonstration plant will be used to support this investigation. --Solid byproduct must go to hazardous waste disposal at a high cost, with no revenue from resource recovery. Preliminary data analysis suggests other viable pathways for reduced disposal cost or re-use. --No revenue from sale of carbon credits. --No monetization of HTL's additional benefits, such as a smaller footprint than digesters, and destruction of contaminants such as PFAS. Key assumptions are summarized in Table 1. Table 2 summarizes the business case results. While revenue for BAU is higher due to value of RNG compared to biocrude, BAU O&M costs are higher due to biosolids management costs. The net result is a lower annual operating cost (OPEX) for HTL. Capital cost (CAPEX) of HTL is higher than BAU. The resulting lifecycle savings for full-scale HTL outweigh the cost of the HTL demonstration, despite the conservative assumptions. A sensitivity analysis on several parameters will be presented in the paper. The greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of the two scenarios were compared. In BAU, RNG displaces natural gas in building heating. The HTL biocrude is refined into fuel that displaces diesel in transportation. The carbon intensity of the finished fuel from HTL was estimated using GHGenius version 4.03, a lifecycle analysis model for transportation fuels in Canada. While HTL has higher operating emissions than BAU, the greater avoided emissions result in a net GHG benefit for HTL (Table 3). The finished fuel from HTL biocrude would generate credits under the BC Low Carbon Fuel Standard, trading at an average of US$352/tCO2e over the past year (Table 4). For a 31,000 tCO2e/year reduction, the carbon credits have a value of US$222 million over 20 years. This would greatly improve the HTL business case, but was not considered in the current analysis. There are more than 15,000 publicly-owned wastewater recovery facilities (WRRFs) sized at 17 MegaLitres per day (ML/d) [4.6 million gal/d] or larger in the USA. Using HTL to process the sludge from all of these WRRFs would eliminate an estimated US$3.29B/y in sludge disposal costs while producing 3.67 GL/y [0.97 Bgal/y] of biocrude intermediate, equivalent to 0.3 percent of crude consumption in the USA (Seiple, 2020). ...Next Steps The HTL demonstration project will provide critical information to fill knowledge gaps and refine the business case for full-scale implementation. The project team has developed: - A detailed 12-month operational and testing plan to assess the impact of feedstock variability and HTL process settings on biocrude and byproduct yield and quality. - An extensive byproduct work plan to determine options for pre-treatment, resource recovery and disposal during the demonstration. - Business case workshops to engage key stakeholders to establish financial and non-financial success factors, and analyze the BAU and HTL scenarios using Multi-Objective Decision Analysis, with or without monetization of factors such as value of carbon. Highlights of these plans will be presented in this paper. Ultimately, the commercial viability of HTL depends on producing a continuous supply of biocrude with consistent quality, as well as identifying economic and technically feasible outlets for the aqueous and solid byproducts. ...Significance As utilities face challenges with land application and landfilling of biosolids, HTL offers a solution that greatly reduces the volume of solids to be managed, destroys contaminants, and creates valuable low-carbon fuels. In a relatively conservative industry, demonstration of HTL at a relevant scale is a critical step to inform business case analysis toward full-scale implementation.

This paper was presented at the WEF Residuals & Biosolids and Innovations in Treatment Technology Joint Conference, May 6-9, 2025.

SpeakerLycke, Derek

Presentation time

10:35:00

10:55:00

Session time

10:15:00

11:45:00

SessionAdvanced Thermal Processes for Sustainable Biosolids Management: Case Studies and Innovations

Session number25

Session locationBaltimore Convention Center, Baltimore, Maryland, USA

TopicBiosolids treatment, business case evaluation, Hydrothermal Liquefaction, Innovative Technology, PFAS/Emerging Contaminants, Sludge treatment

Author(s)

Zaremba, Lillian, Taponat, Marie-Claude, Blair, David, Farinelli, Zeno, Cotter, Lucy, Lycke, Derek, Roxburgh, Ruth

Author(s)L. Zaremba1, M. Taponat1, D. Blair1, Z. Farinelli1, L. Cotter2, D. Lycke2, R. Roxburgh2

Author affiliation(s)Metro Vancouver, 1Metro Vancouver, 1Metro Vancouver, 1metro vancouver, 1Jacobs, 2Jacobs Solutions Inc., 2Jacobs, 2

SourceProceedings of the Water Environment Federation

Document typeConference Paper

PublisherWater Environment Federation

Print publication date May 2025

DOI10.2175/193864718825159798

Volume / Issue

Content sourceResiduals and Biosolids Conference

Word count13

Base text size -

Lycke, Derek

Site admin