The main aim of the week was to research more in depth the treatments. We created mass flow diagrams for the 12 systems with the highest rankings in the Multiple Criteria Analysis. Finding precise values was a very lengthy process! Part of the group also started compiling the final report.
However, our highlight of the week was our visit to the Reading Waste Water Treatment plant! We were lucky to have Ian Cranshaw from MWH with us. It was very nice to finally see a WWTP, a topic we have been working on intensively for the past 3 weeks!
We saw all the different treatments that take place, and of course we got to endure the unique odour associated with each one of them. This trip made us realize the importance of upstream processes to reduce odours! It also shed light on the importance of the positioning of each process. For example, there are a lot of solids being transported from the primary treatment to the anaerobic sludge treatment so they have to be placed next to each other to minimize pumping energy. Whereas the secondary treatment can be further away because the input consists mainly of liquids. The tertiary treatment has to be close to the river where the treated water will be discharged. We were impressed by the aesthetics of the WWTP, a crucial factor in improving public perception!
Welcome to our blog! We are SSS (Sustainable Sewage Solutions). Our client has asked us to analyse the potential options available to maximise resource efficiency for an innovative wastewater (WW) treatment plant they want to build. Here are their two main requirements:
We were advised to use a multi-criteria analysis (MCA) to select the processes that best fit our objectives. The analysis has to take into account the economy, energy and environmental impacts. We spent the first day reading all the articles recommended by the client, summarising them and classifying them, in order to facilitate our research at later stages. We then started looking for current and future treatments that could be used in our plant. For each treatment statistical data and figures were gathered, we then scored each treatment for the MCA.
We had a meeting with the client on Monday. We prepared a 10 page report and a presentation to explain our work over the past week. The clients were very impressed with the extensive work we had done. However, they had many comments and suggestions. There were many processes we hadn’t understood properly, and we had misplaced some of them on them on the WWTP process diagram.
We also showed them the Pecha Kucha presentation (20 slides, 20 seconds each) we had to submit the next day. We were advised on how to make our Pecha Kucha clearer and which topics were of most importance. A couple of our team members stayed up until late to finish the presentation on time. That’s called dedication!
We spent the rest of the week completing the MCA, and finding advantages and disadvantages of each process. We also wrote summaries of each processes for the week 2 report. Weights were added for each criteria so our model takes into account the relative importance of each. Creating a flow chart on the wall with all the processes (don't forget to watch the video) helped us visualise the project. Additionally, we researched design specification for the high scoring processes as well as the EU WW directives. Once we had more information about the processes, we created a mind map on process compatibility.
1-2 of 2