Odor investigation and control at a WWTP in orange county, florida

Cooper, C. David; Godlewski, Victor J.; Hanson, Ray; Koletzke, Mark; Webster, Neil A.

doi:10.1002/ep.670200308

Cited by 12 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Of these, H 2 S is the most common and prevailing odorant associated with wastewater, typically present in high concentrations. Its odour threshold (Environmental Health and Safety Department, 2009) is very low (0.7 mg m À3 or 0.5 ppb) while in some cases concentrations up to 3000 ppm v have been detected (Abbott, 1993;Cooper et al, 2001;DEFRA, 2003;Iranpour et al, 2005). An integrated management of odours emitted from a WWTP requires the accurate detection of the sources that contribute the most to the total odour impact.…”

Section: Odour Nuisance From Wwtpmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing odour nuisance from wastewater treatment and composting facilities in Greece

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The problem of odour nuisances in Greece was explored using: (a) field measurements of a range of malodorous compounds (hydrogen sulfide, ammonia, benzene, toluene, xylenes, formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, acetone, methyl-mercaptan and carbonyl sulfide) from selected wastewater treatment plants and composting facilities; and (b) questionnaires, completed by wastewater treatment plant operators, to investigate potential odour problems, the odour abatement technologies used, and potential interest and motives for adopting such technologies. The sparse information available in the literature is also exploited. Results indicate that on several occasions there was an odour problem, often stemming from the uncontrolled city sprawl, which results in mixed and often conflicting land uses. This is particularly true for wastewater treatment plants, which tend to be built close to built-up areas and highlights the importance of town planning as a tool to minimize odour problems. Measurement of odours and/or odour related gases is not commonly practised in Greece, while the odour abatement systems currently used are often considered inadequate by plant managers who do have an active interest in using more efficient and effective technologies. To our knowledge, this is the first systematic effort to monitor the odour nuisance in the country.

show abstract

Section: Odour Nuisance From Wwtpmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing odour nuisance from wastewater treatment and composting facilities in Greece

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Odor control for such facilities as rendering plants (76), spent grain dryers (77), pharmaceutical plants (78)(79)(80), and cellulose pulping has been reviewed (81,82). Odor control at a wastewater treatment plant in Orange County, Florida, was being accomplished (but not consistently well) by a chlorine-caustic scrubber, but that was replaced by a biofiltration unit with excellent results (83). The odor-control performances of activated carbon and permanganate-alumina for reducing odor level of air streams containing olefins, esters, aldehydes, ketones, amines, sulfide, mercaptan, vapor from decomposed crustacean shells, and stale tobacco smoke have been compared (84).…”

Section: Odor Controlmentioning

confidence: 99%

Air Pollution Control Methods

Cooper

2007

Kirk-Othmer Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Air pollution is defined as the presence in the outdoor atmosphere (ambient air) of one or more contaminants in such quantities and for such duration as to be harmful or injurious to human health or welfare, animal or plant life, or property, or may unreasonably interfere with the enjoyment of life or property. It is useful to study the causes and sources of the various air pollutants, as well as their physical and chemical characteristics and these are discussed. There are many different air pollutants, all with differing physical and chemical characteristics, as well as a vast number and variety of air pollution sources. Therefore, a good understanding of the pollutants and their sources is necessary before a particular control technology can be selected for best application to any particular situation. Some of the most common pollutants have been well known for decades, and continue to be emitted at rates exceeding millions of tons per year (in the United States alone). These “traditional” air pollutants include particulate matter (PM), sulfur oxides (SO x ), nitrogen oxides (NO x ), volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and carbon monoxide (CO). Another major pollutant is ground‐level ozone (O 3 ). Ozone is not emitted directly; rather it is formed by photochemical reactions in the atmosphere between NO x and VOCs. Other important pollutants include lead (as leaded gasoline was phased out in the 1980s, the U.S. emissions of lead into the atmosphere dropped by 95% or more), hazardous air pollutants (HAPs), including lead, mercury, formaldehyde, benzene, and many others, several ozone‐depleting compounds (such as chlorofluorocarbons), and greenhouse gases, such as carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) and methane (CH 4 ). A brief review of the pollutants is presented here. Air pollution regulations are discussed. Sampling and control of air pollution is detailed. This includes information on the control of gaseous emissions, particulate matter emissions and mobile source emissions. Methods and sampling for control of odors is included.

show abstract

“…H 2 S has often been cited as the compound contributing the most to odor problems from WWTPs although the releases of odorous compounds to the air can occur from several different processing units within a WWTP (Cooper et al, 2001). Yet, although H 2 S is not an ideal marker of sewage odors, it has been believed to be the best single-odorant analytical marker for sewage odors available (Gostelow et al, 2004).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Modeling odor dispersion from a wastewater treatment plant based on olfactometry measurements vs. theoretical H<SUB>2</SUB>S emissions

Laor¹,

Ravid²,

Abbou³

et al. 2012

proc water environ fed

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The new odor regulations in Israel include the use of AERMOD dispersion model to assess the odor impact of emitting sources. Odor emission inputs should base on air samples collected at the source and analyzed by dynamic olfactometry according to the international standard EN13725. Before the new regulations, environmental authorities and consultants often evaluated odor emissions from wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) from theoretical H 2 S emissions calculated by the WATER9 model. Considering H 2 S as the primary odorant of wastewater treatment odor, these values were used as the input in AERMOD. The present study aims to compare the two inputs (theoretical H 2 S vs. measured odor emissions) and to examine how they affect odor impact assessments from WWTPs. We focus on the activated sludge WWTP of Afula city in Jezre'el Valley, northern Israel (41,000 inhabitants; 7500 m 3 day -1 ) which is located about 3 km west of the city.The input of odor emissions (odor units (OU)/s) was obtained from a series of sampling missions that included the main wastewater collection, storage and treatment units. Air samples were collected into 60-L Tedlar bags by the standard lung method and an EPA-type flux chamber. Olfactometry was conducted on Odile 2510 (Odotech Inc., Canada). The input of H 2 S emissions was obtained from WATER9, based on the concentration of H 2 S at the inlet stream and other physico-chemical parameters. AERMOD was used to assess the impact of each unit and that of the whole plant. The model was used to assess the worst-case impact for 98% of the time, as required by the Israeli regulations for existing facilities.The total H 2 S emission from the whole plant was calculated as 160,900 μg/s whereas the total measured odor emission was 110,800 OU/s. Considering odor threshold of ~1 ppb H 2 S (1.42 μg /m 3 ), the odor impact from the whole plant is similar based on the two inputs. Yet, the relative contribution of each treatment unit was different by using the two approaches. The main difference is the relative contribution of the sewage inlet and the aeration basin: The sewage inlet trench contributed 47% out of the total H 2 S emission vs. only 9% out of the total odor emissions.On the other hand, the aeration basin contributed 36% out of the total H 2 S emissions vs. 69% out of the total odor emissions. The advantages and disadvantages of each approach are discussed.

show abstract

Odor investigation and control at a WWTP in orange county, florida

Cited by 12 publications

References 0 publications

Assessing odour nuisance from wastewater treatment and composting facilities in Greece

Assessing odour nuisance from wastewater treatment and composting facilities in Greece

Air Pollution Control Methods

Modeling odor dispersion from a wastewater treatment plant based on olfactometry measurements vs. theoretical H<SUB>2</SUB>S emissions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About