-------
-------
SECTION VIII
CQSTJ.^ENERGY_AND__ NON-WATER QUALITY^ASPECTS
This section presents an evaluation of the costs, energy requirements,
and non-water quality aspects associated with the treatment and
control alternatives developed in Section VII in terms of the model
processes and factories developed in Section V.
In absence of complete cost information for individual processes, the
cost figures developed herein are based on reliable actual cost
figures reported for various installations coupled with engineering
estimates. An estimate completely applicable to all members of an
entire industry is obviously impossible. For instance, it .must be
realized,that land costs vary widely. Construction cost, in terms of
both labor and material costs, is another element that is highly
variable. The costs presented herein have been developed for the
different industry subcategories, rather than the entire industry,
thus reducing some of the variability expected in costs.
The following assumptions are common for all of the cost estimates in
this section:
1. All costs are reported in August 1971 dollars.
2. Annual interest rate for capital cost is assumed at 8 percent.
3= All investment cost is depreciated over a period of twenty years
except for trucks and bulldozers which are depreciated over ten years.
1. salvage value is assumed to be zero at the end of the depreciation
period. *
5. Depreciation is straight line.
6. Total Yearly Cost = (Investment cost /2) (0.08) + Yearly
Depreciation Cost + Yearly Operating Cost.
SUBCATEGORY_I
A model factory representative of Subcategbry I factories was
developed in Section V for the purpose of applying various control and
treatment alternatives which are applicable to reduce the resulting
waste loadings from the model factory. Eight alternatives were
selected in Section VII as being applicable engineering alternatives.
These alternatives provide for various levels of waste reductions for
the model factory, which grinds 2,730 metric tons (3,000 tons) of
gross cane per day.
-------
Cost and Reduction Benefits of Alternative Treatment and Control
Technologies for Subcategory. I
In developing the costs of the various control and treatment
alternatives for Subcategory I, the following specific assumptions
were made:
1. There are 70 grinding days per year.,
2. Increasing evaporator vessels body height will not require
reinforcing rings.
3. Pumping costs for a flow-through cane wash system
are the same as for a recirculation system*
4. Contract labor is assumed at $12.25/hr.
5. Plant labor is assumed at $4.00/hr.
6. Excavation costs are assumed to be $1.67/cu.m ($1.26/cu.yd).
7. Clearing and grubbing are assumed to be $2,070/ha ($840/acre).
8. Grading costs are assumed to be $3,110/ha ($1,260/acre).
9. Embankment costs are assumed to be $1.67/cu.m ($1.26/cu.yd).
10. Dredging costs are assumed to be $0.67/cu.m . ($0.51/cu.yd).
11. Truck loading costs are assumed to be $0.78/cu.m ($0.59/cu.yd)
12. Truck hauling is done on a contract basis and therefore no
capital investment is required for trucks.
13. Truck hauling costs are assumed to be $0.40/cu.m - kilometer
($0.49/cu.yd - mile).
14. Truck hauling distances of from 2.41 to 16.1 kilometers
(1.5 to 10 miles) per round trip are assumed.
15. Electrical costs are assumed to be $0.023 per kilowatt-hr.
Alternative A - This alternative assumes no added treatment and
therefore no reduction in the waste loading. It is estimated that the
effluent from a 2,730 metric tons (3000 tons) of gross cane per day
factory is 45,800 cubic nteters (12.1 million gallons) per day. The
BOD5 waste loading is 2.08 kilograms per metric ton (4.16 pounds per
ton) of gross cane and the suspended solids loading is 17.56 kilograms
per metric ton (35.1 pounds per ton) of gross cane.
204
-------
Costs: 0
Reduction Benefits: None
Alternative B - This alternative consists of adding those in-plant
modifications~which may or may not be practiced at the individual
factories which would enable a factory to attain the level of
technology typified by the model factory. These procedures include
the dry hauling or impoundage of filter mud, the dry hauling or
impoundage of boiler ash, and the addition of entrainment controls for
evaporators and vacuum pans. The following measures are taken to
achieve a reduction in sucrose entrainment into barometric condenser
cooling water:
- proper operation and good maintenance of entrainment controls
- improved baffling in evaporators and pans
- monitoring of barometric condenser cooling water
- increase vapor height in evaporators and pans
- addition of centrifugal separators to evaporators and pans
- addition of external separators for the last effect evaporators
Not all factories which experience high loses of sucrose into
barometric condenser cooling water would have to employ all of the
techniques listed above, but would in all probability utilize certain
of these procedures.
The resulting 3OD5 waste loading is 2.08 kilograms per metric ton
(4.16 pounds per ton) of gross cane and the suspended solids loading
is 17.56 kilograms per metric ton (35.1 pounds per ton) of gross cane.
Alternative B-l:
Cooling Water.
Reduction of Entrainment into Barometric Condenser
Costs: Incremental Investment Cost:
Incremental Yearly Cost:
Sugar and Molasses Savings:
Alternative,!^!; Dry Hauling of Filter Cake.
Costs: incremental Investment Cost:
Incremental Yearly Cost:
$120,000
27,800
41,200
$37,800
16,400
Alternative B-3; Impoundage of Filter Mud Slurry.
Costs
Incremental Investment Cost:
Incremental Yearly cost:
Alternative B-4; Dry Hauling of Ash.
Costs: Incremental Investment Cost:
Incremental Yearly cost:
$50,200
8,900
$31,100
8,600
205
-------
M£ernative_B;z5: Impoundage of Ash Slurry.
Costs: Incremental Investment Cost:
Incremental Yearly Cost:
$44,500
7,800
Itemized cost breakdowns for Alternatives B-l through B-5 are presented
in Tables 61 through 68.
Reduction Benefits:
The reduction benefits for Alternative B
involve BOD5 and suspended solids
reductions to the levels typified by
.the model plant.
Alternative C - This alternative involves the use of sedimentation
ponds to settle all of the waste water discharge streams except
barometric condenser cooling water and excess condensate. The
resulting BOD5 waste loading is 2.08 kilograms per metric ton (4.16
pounds per ton) of gross cane and the suspended solids loading is 2.51
kilograms per metric ton (5.02 pounds per ton) of gross cane.
Costs: Incremental Investment Cost: $ 75,700
Incremental Yearly Cost: 26,200 - 64,600
Total Investment Cost:
Total Yearly cost:
$75,700
26,200 - 64,600
An itemized cost breakdown for Alternative C is presented in Table 69.
Reduction Benefits: The reduction benefits for Alternative C
involve a suspended solids reduction of 85.7
percent. The incremental reductions due
to Alternative c are assumed to be 0.0
percent for BOD5 and 85.7 percent for
suspended solids.
Alternative D - This alternative involves the treatment of the
effluent from the settling pond, discussed in Alternative C, in an
oxidation pond designed for total detention of the waste stream for
the entire grinding season. The resulting BOD5 loading is expected to
be less than 0.63 kilograms per metric ton (1.26 pounds per ton) of
gross cane and the suspended solids loading is expected to be less
than 0.47 kilograms per metric ton (0.94 pounds per ton) of gross
cane. * - •
Costs: Incremental Investment Cost:
Incremental Yearly Cost:
Total Investment Cost:
Total Yearly Cost
$383,000
47,200
$459,000
73,400 - 112,000
206
-------
TABLE 64
ITEMIZED COST SUMMARY OF
ALTERNATIVE B-l FOR SUBCATEGORY I
Investment Costs
Items: 1. Improved Baffling $ 6,000
2. Monitoring Equipment 3,600
3. Increase Vapor Height 16,000
4. Centrifugal Separators For Evaporators 30,000
5. Centrifugal Separators For Pans 23,000
6. External Separators 20,000
7. Engineering 11,000
8. Contingencies 10.000
Total Cost $119,600
Operating Costs
Items: 1.
Yearly Costs
I terns:
Operating and Maintenance
Total Cost
Operating Cost
Investment Cost
Depreciation Cost
4. Annual Sugar and Molasses Savings
Total Cost
$ 17,000
$ 17,000
$ 17,000
4,780
5,980
(41.200)
$(13,400)
207
-------
TABLE 65
ITEMIZED COST SUMMARY OF
ALTERNATIVE B-2 FOR SUBCATEGORY I
Investment Costs
Items: 1. Mud Storage Bin
2. Conveyor
Total Cost
$ 26,900
10.900
$ 37,800
Operating Costs
Items: 1. Operating A Maintenance
Total Cost
$ 13.000
$ 13,000
Yearly Costs
Items:
1. Operating Cost
2. Investment Cost
3. Depreciation Cost
Total Cost
$ 13,000
1,500
1.900
$ 16,400
208
-------
TABLE 66
ITEMIZED COST SUMMARY OF
ALTERNATIVE B-3 FOR SUBCATEGORY I
Investment Costs
Items: 1. Pump, pipes, electrical
2. Pond (Installed)
3. Contingencies
4. Engineering
Total Cost
$ 12,000
29,500
4,150
4.570
$ 50,200
Operating Costs
Items: 1. Operating & Maintenance
2. Power
Total Cost
$ 4,180
180
$ 4,360
Yearly Costs
Items:
1. Operating Cost
2. Investment Cost
3. Depreciation Cost
Total Cost
$ 4,360
2,000
2.500
•*. '
$ 8,860
Land:
1.46 hectares
209
-------
TABLE 67
ITEMIZED COST SUMMARY OF
ALTERNATIVE B-4 FOR SUBCATE60RY I
Investment Costs
Items: 1. Ash Storage Bin
2. Conveyor
Total Cost
$ 20,200
10.900
$ 31,100
Operating Costs
Items: 1. Operating & Maintenance
Total Cost
$ 5.800
$ 5,800
Yearly Costs
Items:
1. Operating Cost
2. Investment Cost
3. Depreciation Cost
Total Cost
$ 5,800
1,240
1.560
$~ 8,600
210
-------
TABLE 68
ITEMIZED COST SUMMARY OF
ALTERNATIVE B-5 FOR SUBCATEGORY I
Investment Costs
Items: 1. Pump, pipes, electrical
2. Pond (Installed)
3. Contingencies
4. Engineering
Total Cost
$ 12,000
24,800
3,680
4.050
$ 44,500
Operating Costs
Items: 1. Operating & Maintenance
2. Power
Total Cost
$ 3,580
180
$ 3,760
Yearly Costs
Items:
1. Operating Cost
2. Investment Cost
3. Depreciation Cost
Total Cost
$ 3,760
1,780
2.230
$ 7>70
Land:
1.22 hectares
211
-------
TABLE 69
ITEMIZED COST SUMMARY OF
ALTERNATIVE C FOR SUBCATEGORY I
Investment Costs
Items: 1. Ponds
2. Contingencies
3. Engineering
Total Cost
$ 62,500
6,250
6.900
$ 75,650
Operating Costs
Items: 1. Maintenance
2. Solids Handling
Total Cost
$ 840
18,600 - 57.000
$ 19,400 - 57,800
Yearly Costs
Items: 1.
2.
3.
Operating Cost
Investment Cost
Depreciation Cost
Total Cost
$ 19,400
3,030
3.780
- 57,800
$ 26,200 - 64,600
Land:
1.62 hectares
212
-------
An itemized dost breakdown for Alternative D is presented in Table 70.
Reduction Benefits:
The reduction benefits for Alternative D
involve a BOD5 reduction of greater than 69.7
percent and a suspended solids reduction
of greater than 97.3 percent. The incremental
reductions due to Alternative D are 69.7
percent for BCD5 and 11.6 percent for suspended
solids.
Alternative E - This alternative involves the treatment of the
effluent from the settling pond, discussed in Alternative C, in an
aerated lagoon designed with a quiescent zone and a total detention
time of 9.5 days. The resulting BODJ5 loading is 0.63 kilograms per
metric ton (1.26 pounds per ton) of gross cane and the suspended
solids loading is 0.47 kilograms per metric ton (0.94 pounds per ton)
of gross cane*
Costs: Incremental Investment Cost:
Incremental Yearly Cost:
Total Investment Cost:
Total Yearly Cost:
$393,000
56,700
$469,000
82,900 - 121,000
An itemized cost breakdown for Alternative E is presented in Table 71.
Reduction Benefits:
The reduction benefits for Alternative E
involve a BOD5 reduction of 69.7 percent and
a suspended solids reduction of 97.3 percent.
The incremental reductions due to Alternative
D are 69.7 percent for BOD5 and 11.6 percent
for suspended solids. «
Alternative F - This alternative involves the use of a settling pond
to settle and recycle the cane wash water. The blowdown from the
recycle system is contained in an oxidation pond for the entire season
and discharged after the season to assure waste stabilization. The
resulting BOD5 waste loading is 0.53 kilograms per metric ton (1.06
pounds per ton) of gross cane 'and the suspended solids loading is
0.080 kilograms per metric ton (0.16 pounds per ton) of gross cane.
Costs: Incremental Investment cost:
Incremental Yearly Cost:
Total Investment Cost:
Total Yearly Cost:
$199,000
58,500 - 104,000
$199,000
58,500 - 104,000
An itemized cost breakdown for Alternative F is presented in Table 72.
213
-------
TABLE 70
ITEMIZED COST SUMMARY OF
ALTERNATIVE D FOR SUBCATEGORY I
Investment Costs
Items: 1. Pond
2. Pump, Sump and Piping
3. Contingencies
4. Engineering
Total Cost
$ 308,000
8,600
31,700
34.800
$ 383,100
Operating Costs
Items: 1. Operation & Maintenance
2. ChemicaT Cost
3. Power Cost
Total Cost
8,900
2,900
870
$ 12,700
Yearly Costs
Items:
1. Operating Cost
2. Investment Cost
3. Depreciation Cost
Total Cost
$ 12,700
15,300
19,200
$ 47,200
Land:
83 hectares
214
-------
TABLE 71
ITEMIZED COST SUMMARY OF
ALTERNATIVE E FOR SUBCATEGORY I
Investment Costs
Items: 1. Aerated Lagoon
2. Pump, Sump and Piping
3. Contingencies
4. Engineering
Total Cost
$316,000
8,600
32,500
35,700
$393,000
Operating Costs
Items: 1. Operation & Maintenance
2. Chemical Cost
3. Power Cost
Total Cost
$ 11,700
2,900
6,700
$ 21,300
Yearly Costs
Items: 1.
2.
3.
.Operating Cost
Investment Cost
Depreciation Cost
Total Cost
$ 21,300
15 ,,700
19,700
$ 56,700
Land:
5.3 hectares
215
-------
TABLE 72
.ITEMIZED COST SUMMARY OF
ALTERNATIVE F FOR SUBCATEGORY I
Investment Costs
Items: 1. Settling Ponds
2. Cane Wash Recycle System
3. Oxidation Pond
4. Contingencies
5. Engineering
Total Cost
$ 62,500
60,700
41,600
16,500
18.100
$199,400
Operating Costs
Items:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Settling Pond Maintenance
Cane Wash Recycle Maintenance
Oxidation Pond Maintenance
Power Cost
Total Cost
$ 22,900 - 68,600
13,500
3,400
730
$ 40,500 - 86,200
Yearly Costs
Items: 1.
' 2.
3.
Operating Cost
Investment Cost
Depreciation Cost
Total Cost
$ 40,500 - 86,200
8,000
10,000
$ 58,500 -104,200
Land:
6.7 hectares
216
-------
Reduction Benefits:
The reduction benefits for Alternative F
involve a BOD5 reduction of 74.5 percent and
a suspended solids reduction of 99.5 percent.
The incremental reductions due to Alternative
F are 7U.5 percent for BODS and 99.5 percent
for suspended solids. ~
Alternative
~ - This alternative involves the recycle of barometric
condenser cooling water and cane wash water. The blowdown from the
barometric condenser cooling water recycle system is assumed to be the
makeup to the cane wash recirculation system. The blowdown from the
cane wash recirculation system and the miscellaneous waste streams are
treated in an oxidation pond, designed with a detention time
equivalent to the entire season, and discharged after stabilisation.
_ BOD5 waste loading is 0.050 kilograms per metric ton
o n«n°I^?S Per t0n) °f gr°SS Cane and the susPended solids loading
0.080 kilograms per metric ton (0.16 pounds per ton) of gross cane.
Costs: Incremental Investment Cost:
Incremental Yearly Cost:
Total Investment Cost:
Total Yearly cost:
$389,000
92,200 - 138,000
$389,000
92,200 - 138,000
An itemized cost breakdown for Alternative G is presented in Table 73.
Reduction Benefits: The reduction benefits for Alternative G
involve a BODS reduction of 97;6 percent
and a suspended solids reduction of 99.5
percent. The incremental reductions due
to Alternative G are 97.6 percent for BODS
and 99.5 percent for suspended solids.
Alt|rnative_H_ - This alternative involves the recycle of barometric
condenser cooling water and cane wash water. The blowdown from the
barometric condenser cooling water recirculation system is assumed to
SSrvn Si makeup *° t*6 cane wash recirculation system. The blowdown
from the cane wash recirculation system and the miscellaneous waste
!£?™L "fh trf^6? .in tw° aerated lagoons operated in series,
designed with a total detention time of 28 days and with a quiescent
^ne',n -J re;!ultln9 BOD5- waste loading is 0.050 kilograms per metric
iSdin; iS°Uo n«SeV?n) °f grQSS Cane and the suspendSd solids
loading is 0.080 kilograms per metric ton (0.16 pounds per ton) of
ylTOSS C3.D.6*
Costs: Incremental Investment Cost: $525,000
Incremental Yearly Cost: 126,000 - 171,000
Total Investment Cost:
Total Yearly Cost:
$525,000
126,000 - 171,000
217
-------
TABLE 73
ITEMIZED COST SUMMARY OF
ALTERNATIVE 6 FOR SUBCATE60RY I
Investment Costs
Items: 1. Settling Ponds
2. Cane Wash Recycle System
3. Barometric Condenser Cooling
Water Recirculation System
4. Oxidation Pond
5. Contingencies
6. Engineering
Total Cost
$ 62,500
60,700
155,000
43,200
32,100
35,400
$388,900
Operating Costs
Items;
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Settling Pond Maintenance
Cane Wash Recycle Maintenance
Condenser Recirculation Maintenance
& Operation
Oxidation Pond Maintenance
Power Cost
Total Cost
$ 22,900
13,500
10,700
3,400
6,700
- 68,600
$ 57,200 - 102,900
Yearly Costs
Items:
1. Operating Cost
2. Investment Cost
3. Depreciation Cost
Total Cost
$ 57,200
15,600
19,400
- 102,900
$ 92,200 - 137,900
Land:
7.1 hectares
218
-------
An itemized cost breakdown for Alternative H is presented in Table 74.
Reduction Benefits:
The reduction benefits for Alternative H in-
volve a BOD5 reduction of 97.6 percent and a
suspended solids reduction of 99.5 percent.
The incremental reductions due to Alternative-
H are 97.6 percent for BOD5 and 99.5 percent
for suspended solids.
A summary of the costs for all of the
Table 75.
alternatives is presented in
Related Energy, Requirements of Alternative Treatment and Control
Technologies for Subcategorg I ~
Table 76 illustrates the estimated energy requirements for the
application of the various treatment alternatives to the Subcategory I
model factory. Energy requirements in the form of electrical energy
needed for the operation of pumps, aerators, and spray nozzels, and
the energy required for the disposal of solid wastes is compared to
the overall energy requirements of the model factory. In order . to
place the energy requirements of the various alternatives in proper
perspective, it should be noted that a typical 2,730 metric tons
(3,000 tons) of gross cane per day factory consumes 3.15 million
kilowatt-hours of electricity per year and requires 110 million
kilograms (2U2 million pounds) of steam per year. In the estimate of
total factory energy requirements, no allowance was made for usage of
fuel associated with the harvesting and transportation of sugarcane.
Therefore, the percentage increases in energy requirements presented
in Table 76 are .considered to be the maximum requirements for the
application of the various treatment alternatives at^ the model
factory. *
As shown in Table 76, the two major uses of energy resulting from the
application of the various treatment alternatives by Subcategory I
factories are the recirculation of barometric condenser cooling water
and the use of aerated lagoons as a treatment method. Alternatives E,
G, and H require substantially greater energy usage than the other
alternatives. Of these alternatives. Alternative H employs both a
barometric condenser cooling water recirculation system and an aerated
lagoon and would be the largest user of energy.
SUBCATEGORY II :
A model factory representative of Subcategory II factories was
developed in Section V and existing control and treatment was
established and considered as part of the model plant because of its
universal practice. As a result, it was concluded in Section VII that
219
-------
TABLE 74
ITEMIZED COST SUMMARY OF
ALTERNATIVE H FOR SUBCATEGORY I
Investment Costs
Items: 1. Settling Ponds $ 62,500
2. Cane Wash Recycle System 60,700
3. Barometric Condenser Cooling Water
Recirculation System 155,000
4. Aerated Lagoon 155,700
5. Contingencies 43,400
6. Engineering 47,700
Total Cost $525,000
Operating Costs
Items:
1,
2.
3.
Settling Pond Maintenance
Cane Wash Recycle Maintenance
Condenser Recirculation Maintenance
& Operation
Aerated Lagoon Maintenance
& Operation
Power Requirements
Total Cost
$ 22,900
13,500
10,700
12,700
18.600
- 68,600
$ 78,400 - 124,100
Yearly Costs
Items:
1. Operating Cost
2. Investment Cost
3. Depreciation Cost
Total Cost
$ 78,400
21,000
26,300
- 124,100
$125,700 - 171,400
Land:
2.8 hectares
220
-------
TABLE 75
SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVE COSTS
MODEL PLANT — SUBCATEGORY I
Alternative
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
BODS Loading*
(k?/kkg)
2.08
2.08
2.08
0.63
0.63
0.53
0.050
0.050
TSS Loading*
(kg/kkg)
17.56
17.56
2.51
0.47
0.47
0.080
0.080
0.080
Total Investment
Cost
$ 0
189,000
75,700
459,000
469,000
199,000
389,000
525,000
Total Yearly
Cost-
$0
11,600
26,200- 64,600
73,400-112,000
82,900-121,000
58,500-104,000
92,200-138,000
126,000-171,000
*Gross Cane Basis.
221
-------
TABLE 76
YEARLY ENERGY USAGE FOR MODEL FACTORY
SUBCATEGORY I
Alternative
A
B-l
B-2
B-3
B-4
B-5
C
D
E
F
G
H
Power Usage
(kw-hr/yr)
0
0
0
7,830
0
7,83.0
•0'
; 37,800
291,000 '
31,700
291 ,000
809,000
Gasoline Usage
(liters/yr)
' •=' . 0
0_
3,310,
, • o
1 ,060
•• -.0
• 3,310-22>,TOO
- 3,310-22',100
'3,310-22,100
3,970-26,500
3,970-26,500
3,970-26,500
Percent of Total
Energy Requirement
'" •' ,- 0%
0
0.035
0.021
0.011
0.021
0.035-0.23
0.14 -0.33
V0.84 -1.06
0.13 -0.36
0.84 -1.07
2.24 -2.47
222
-------
the model factory attains a certain level of treatment and that no
significant reduction benefits can be achieved by the application . of
control and treatment schemes.
Cost and Reduction Benefits of Alternative Treatment and Control
Alternatives for Subcategory II ~
For the model factory developed as representative of Subcategory II,
it is concluded that no further control and treatment is required to
achieve a zero discharge limitation and therefore no additional costs
of control and treatment are incurred.
Related Energy Requirements of Alternative Treatment and Control
Technologies for Subcategory II
Since no further control and treatment is required, no added enerav
requirements are incurred.
SUBCATEGORY III
A model factory representative of Subcategory III factories was
developed in Section V for the purpose of applying various control and
treatment alternatives which are available to reduce the resulting
waste loadings from the model factory. Eight alternatives were
selected in Section VII as being applicable engineering alternatives.
These alternatives provide for various levels of waste reductions for
the model factory, which grinds 3,340 metric tons (3,675 tons) of net
cane per day or 6,680 metric tons (7,350 tons) of gross cane per day.
Cost and Reduction Benefits of Alternative Treatment and Control
Technologies for Subcategory III
•~ -n-.—n~.--.-iiH "I" ' i • mill IHII ilni i im
In developing the costs of the various control and treatment
alternatives for Subcategory III, the following specific assumptions
were made:
1. There are 250 grinding days per year.
2. Plant labor is assumed to be $5.88/hr.
3. Excavation and the costs associated with construction of
impoundments is assumed to be $3.30/cu.m ($2.52/cu.yd).
4. Truck hauling is done in-house.
5*« The. COSt of °Eerating trucks is assumed to be $0.13/kilometer
($0.21/mi).
6. A truck hauling distance of 16.1 kilometers (10 miles) is assumed.
223
-------
7. Disposal of muds and ash on land is to a depth of 1.22 meters
(four feet) and, if cane fields are employed for this purpose, it puts
land out of service for three years.
8. Disposal of trash on land is to a depth of 1.5 meters (5 feet)
and, if cane fields are used for this purpose, it puts land out of
service for five years.
9. Cane fields used for disposal of solid waste are leased at $622/ha
($252/acre).
10. Electrical costs are assumed to be $0.023 per kilowatt-hr.
11. All investment costs include engineering and contingencies.
Alternative A - This alternative assumes no treatment and therefore no
reduction in the waste loadings. It is estimated that the effluent
from a 3,340 metric ton (3,675 tons) of net cane per day factory is
42,300 cubic meters (11.2 million gallons) per day. The BOD5 raw
waste loading is 12.3 kilograms per metric ton (24.6 pounds per ton)
of net cane and the suspended solids raw waste loading is 194
kilograms per metric ton (388 pounds per ton) of net cane.
Costs: 0
Reduction Benefits: 0
Should an individual factory not attain that degree of control of
entrainment of sucrose into barometric condenser cooling water which
is exhibited by the model factory, a reduction of BOD5 entrainment
into barometric condenser cooling water is necessary. This can be
accomplished by the following procedures:
T Good maintenance and proper operation
- Monitoring o.f barometric condenser cooling water
Addition of centrifugal separators to the evaporators
and vacuum pans
- Addition of external separators to the evaporators
The addition of these control measures allows for a reduction in the
amount of BOD5 discharged to those levels typified by the model
factory. The reduction of BOD5. into the barometric condenser cooling
water increases sucrose and molasses production.
Alternative A-l:
Cooling Water.
Reduction of Entrainment into Barometric Condenser
Costs: Incremental Investment Cost: $117,900
Incremental Yearly Cost: 37,500
Sugar and Molasses Savings: 24,700
224
-------
An itemized cost breakdown for Alternative A-l is presented in Table
77.
Reduction Benefits:
The reduction benefits for Alternative A
involve reductions in the raw waste loadings
to that level typified by the model factory.
Alternative B: This alternative involves the use of in-plant
modifications~to allow for the filter cake, boiler ashes, and trash to
be dry-hauled. This alternative consists of the following in-plant
modifications: (a) B-l: dry hauling of filter cake, (b) B-2: dry
hauling of boiler ash, and (c) B-3: screening and hauling of trash.
The resulting BOD5 waste loading is 10.0 kilograms per metric ton
(20.0 pounds per ton) of net cane and the suspended solids loading is
170 kilograms per metric ton (340 pounds per ton) of net cane.
Alternative B-l
Costs:
Dry Hauling of Filter Cake.
Incremental Investment Cost:
Incremental Yearly Cost:
Alternative B-2; Dry Hauling of Boiler Ash.
Costs: Incremental Investment cost:
Incremental Yearly Cost:
$112,000
41,800
$112,000
41,800
Alternative B-3; Screening and Hauling of Trash.
Costs: Incremental Investment cost:
Incremental Yearly Cost:
$386,000
196,000
An itemized cost breakdown for Alternative B is presented in Tables 78
through 80.
Reduction Benefits:
The reduction benefits for Alternative B
involve a BOD5 reduction of 18.7X and a sus-
pended solids reduction of 12.4%.
Alternative C_ - This alternative involves clarification of the cane
wash water and miscellaneous waste streams, employing polymer
addition. No BOD5 removal is assumed although removals on the order
of ten to twenty percent would be expected to occur. The resulting
BOD5 waste loading is 10.0 kilograms per metric ton (20.0 pounds per
tonj of net cane and the suspended solids loading is 2.1 kilograms per
metric ton (4.2 pounds per ton) of net cane.
Costs: Incremental Investment Cost:
Incremental Yearly Cost:
$1,594,000
555,000
225
-------
TABLE 77
ITEMIZED COST SUMMARY OF
ALTERNATIVE A-l FOR SUBCATEGORY III
Investment Costs
Items
1. Monitoring Equipment
2. Centrifugal Separators for
Evaporators
3. Centrifugal Separators for Pans
4. External Separators
TOTAL COST
$ 5,540
45,800
35,100
30.500
$116,900
Operating Costs
Items: 1. Operating & Maintenance
TOTAL COST
$ 27,000
$ 27,000
Yearly Costs
Items:
1. Operating Cost
2. Investment Cost
3. Depreciation Cost
4. Annual Sugar & Molasses
TOTAL COST
$ 27,000
4,680
, 5,850
(24.700)
$ 12,800
226
-------
, . , .TABLE 78
ITEMIZED COST SUMMARY OF
ALTERNATIVE B-l FOR SUBCATE60RY III
Investment Costs
Items;
1.
2,
3,
Mud Storage Bin
Conveyor
Truck (1)
Total Cost
$ 50,400
10,900
50.400
$111,700
Operating Costs
Items: 1.
2.
Labor.
Operation & Maintenance
Total Cost
$ 23,500
7,400
$ 30,900
Yearly Costs
Items: 1.
2.
3.
Land:
Operating Cost
Investment Cpst
Depreciation Cost
Total Cost
30,900
2,790
8,110
$ 41,800
$0-7,400/yr.
227
-------
TABLE 79
ITEMIZED COST SUMMARY OF
ALTERNATIVE B-2 FOR SUBCATEGORY III
Investment Costs
Items:
1.
2.
Mud Storage Bin
Conveyor
3. Truck, (1)
Total Cost
$ 50,400
10,900
50.400
$111,700
Operating Costs
Items:
1.
2.
Labor
Operation & Maintenance
Total Cost , -
$23,500
7.400
$ 30,900
Yearly Costs
Items: 1.
2.
3.
Land:
Operating Cost
Investment Cost
Depreciation Cost
Total Cost 1
$ 30,900
2,790
8.110
$ 41,800
$0-7,400/yr.
228
-------
TABLE 80
ITEMIZED COST SUMMARY OF
ALTERNATIVE B-3 FOR SUBCATEGORY III
Investment Costs
Items: 1. Screens
2. Tractors & Trailers (3)
3. Bulldozer
Total Cost
$ 42,000
277,000
67,200
$386,000
Operating Costs
Items:
1.
2.
Labor
Operation & Maintenance
Total Cost
$118,000
32.200
$150,000
Yearly Costs
Items:
1. Operating Cost
2.. Investment Cost
3. Depreciation Cost
Total Cost
$150,000
9,700
36.300
$196,000
Land:
$0-88,500/yr.
229
-------
Total Investment Cost:
Total Yearly Cost:
$2,200,000
835,000
An itemized cost breakdown for Alternative C is presented in Table 81.
Reduction Benefits: The reduction benefits for Alternative C
involve a BOD5 reduction of 18.7 percent and
a suspended solids reduction of 98.9 per-
cent. The incremental reductions due to
Alternative c are 0.0 percent for BOD5 and
86.5 percent for suspended solids.
Alternative D - This alternative involves the treatment of the
settled wastes in an aerated lagoon. The resulting BOD5 waste loading
is 0.83 kilograms per metric ton (1.63 pounds per ton) of net cane arid
the suspended solids loading is 1.1 kilograms per metric ton (2.2
pounds per ton) of net cane.
Costs: Incremental Investment Cost:
Incremental Yearly Cost:
Total Investment Cost:
Total Yearly Cost:
$1,180,000
336,000
$3,380,000
1,170,000
An itemized cost breakdown for Alternative D is presented in Table 82.
Reduction Benefits: The reduction benefits for Alternative D
involve a BOD5 reduction of 93.3 percent and
a suspended solids reduction of 99.4 percent.
The incremental reductions due to Alternative D
are 74.6 percent for BOD5 and 0.5 percent for
suspended solids.
Alternative E - This alternative involves the treatment of the
settled effluent in an activated sludge system. The resulting BOD5
waste loading is 0.57 kilograms per metric ton (1.14 pounds per ton)
of net cane, and the suspended solids loading is 0.61 kilograms per
metric ton (1.22 pounds per ton) of net cane.
Costs; Incremental Investment Cost:
Incremental Yearly Cost:
Total Investment Cost:
Total Yearly Cost:
$2,760,000
686,000
$4,960,000
1,520,000
An itemized cost breakdown for Alternative E is presented in Table 83.
Reduction Benefits: The reduction benefits for Alternative E in-
volve a BOD5 reduction of 95.4 percent and a
230
-------
TABLE 81
ITEMIZED COST SUMMARY OF
ALTERNATIVE C FOR SUBCATEGORY III
Investment Costs
Items: 1.
2.
3.
4.
•5.
6.
Operating Costs
Items:
Yearly Cost
Items:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
1.
2.
3.
Grit Removal
Raw Water Pumps & Wet Wells
Polymer Feeding System
Heavy Duty Thickener
Vacuum Filters (8)
Trucks (4)
Total Cost
Secondary Screen Maintenance
Raw Waste Pumps
Polymer & Polymer Feed System
Thickener Maintenance
Vacuum Filters
Maintenance
Labor
Trucks
Operation & Maintenance
Truck Labor
Plant Labor
Total Cost
Operating Cost
Investment Cost
Depreciation
Total Cost
Land:
$ 42,000
44,000
37,000
328,000
941,000
202,000
$1,594,000
$ 840
22,000
54,600
3,300
47,000
70,600
•*
37,600
129,400
35.300
$401,000
$401,000
63,800
89,800
$555,000
$0-41,700/yr.
231
-------
TABLE 82
ITEMIZED COST SUMMARY OF
ALTERNATIVE D FOR SUBCATE60RY III
Investment Costs
Items:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Operating Costs
Items:
1.
2.
3.
Yearly Costs
Items:
1.
2.
3.
Aerated Lagoons
Pump, Sump, Piping
Contingencies
Engineering
Total Cost
Operating & Maintenance
Chemical Cost
Power Cost
Total Cost
Operating Cost
Investment Cost
Depreciation
Total Cost
Land:
$ 941,000
31,600
97,300
107,000
51,177,000
$ 53,900
60,800
115.600
$ 230,000
$ 230,000
47,100
58.900
$ 336,000
$0-6,600/yr.
232
-------
TABLE 83
ITEMIZED COST SUMMARY OF
ALTERNATIVE E FOR SUBCATEGORY III
Investment Costs
Items:
1.
2.
Activated Sludge System
Miscellaneous Costs
Total Cost
$2,520,000
244.000
$2,760,000
Operating Costs
Items: 1,
2,
Operation & Maintenance of Activated
Sludge System
Power Costs
Total Cost
$ 249,000
189,000
5 438,000
Yearly Costs
Items: 1,
2.
3.
Operating Cost
Investment Cost
Depreciation
Total Cost
$ 438,000
110,000
138,000
i
$ 686,000
Land:
50-1,500/yr.
233
-------
suspended solids reduction of 99.7 percent.
The incremental reductions due to Alternative
E are 76.7 percent for BOD5 and 0.8 percent
for suspended solids.
Consideration of the Use TTQ|:„ Advanced Bar vesting mSys terns
As discussed in Section VII, considerable research and development are
being accomplished at the present time with regard to the usage of
advanced harvesting systems capable of delivering sugarcane to the
factory mills which can be processed without the necessity of a
washing step. It is expected that such a system will be employed at
the Subcategory III factories between 1977 and 1983, and will enable
an individual factory to eliminate the portion of the cane wash water
stream currently associated with that fraction (x) of the net
sugarcane which would be harvested by the advanced systems. A further
assumption is that the same unit waste loadings as developed for the
cane wash water discharge stream from the model factory are applicable
to that portion of the net sugarcane which is not harvested by the
advanced systems.
The following treatment alternatives include the aforementioned
assumption that a fraction (x) of the net sugarcane processed at a
factory is harvested by the advanced harvesting systems. The
following cost analysis assumes that 70S? of the net sugarcane
harvested is harvested by the advanced harvesting systems.
Alternative F - This alternative involves the assumption that
Subcategory III factories will have employed the currently developed
technology cf improved cane harvesting systems. For the purpose of
developing costs considered to be representative of this subcategory,
it has been assumed that 7056 of the net sugarcane is harvested with
the advanced systems. Alternative F involves the biological treatment
of the settled discharge stream in an aerated lagoon. The resulting
BOD5, waste loading is 0.50 kilograms per metric ton (1.0 pounds per
ton) of net cane and the suspended solids loading is 0.31 kilograms
per metric ton (0.62 pounds per ton) of net cane.
Costs: Incremental Investment Cost:
Incremental Yearly Cost:
$447,000
119,000
An itemized cost breakdown for Alternative F is presented in Table 84.
Reduction Benefits:
The reduction benefits for Alternative F
involve a BODJ5 reduction of 95.9 percent
and a suspended solids reduction of 99.8
percent.
Alternative G - This alternative involves similar assumptions with
regard to the model plant as Alternative F. Alternative G involves a
234
-------
TABLE 84
ITEMIZED COST SUMMARY OK
ALTERNATIVE F FOR SUBCATEGORY III
Investment Costs
Items: 1.
2.
3.
4.
Aerated Lagoons
Pump, Sump, and Piping
Contingencies
Engineering
Total Cost
$ 349,000
20,200
36,900
40.600
$ 446,700
Operating Costs
Items: 1,
2,
3,
Operation & Maintenance
Chemical Costs
Power Costs
Total Cost
$ 23,900
18,500
35.900
$ 78,300
Yearly Costs
Items:
Land:
1. Operating Cost
2. Investment Cost
3. Depreciation
total Cost
$ 78,300
* 17,900
22,300
$ 118,500
$0-l,760/yr.
235
-------
cane wash water recirculation system with discharge of the settled
twenty percent blowdown and miscellaneous waste water discharge stream
to an aerated lagoon. The resulting BOD5 waste loading is 0.39
kilograms per metric ton (0.78 pounds per ton) of net cane and the
suspended solids loading is 0.071 kilograms per metric ton (0.142
pounds per ton) of net cane.
Costs: Incremental Investment Cost:
Incremental Yearly Cost:
$473,000
205,000
An itemized cost breakdown for Alternative G is presented in Table 85.
Reduction Benefits: The reduction benefits for Alternative G
involve a BOD5 reduction of 96.8 percent
and a suspended solids reduction of 99.9
percent.
Alterative S ~ This alternative involves similar assumptions with
regard to the model plant as Alternative F. Alternative H
incorporates the addition of a barometric condenser cooling water
recirculation system with discharge of the blowdown to the cane wash
water system, and the addition of a biological system in the form of
an aerated lagoon to treat.the settled cane wash water and other
discharge.streams. The resulting BOD5 waste loading is 0.23 kilograms
per metric ton (0.47 pounds per ton) of net cane and the suspended
solids loading is 0.31 kilograms per metric ton (0.62 pounds per ton)
of net cane.
Costs: Incremental Investment Cost:
Incremental Yearly Cost:
$582,000
157,000
An itemized cost breakdown for Alternative H is presented in Table 86
Reduction Benefits:
The reduction benefits for Alternative H
involve a BOD5 reduction of 98.1 percent
and a suspended solids reduction of 99.8
percent.
An assumption which significantly affects the calculation of the costs
of pollution abatement to Subcategory III factories involves the
choice of a method of disposing of solid wastes on the land.
Information presented in Tables 77 through 86 includes a range of
costs associated with land, usage. At least three distinct
alternatives exist. One alternative would be to assume that existing
cane fields are taken out of production for varying periods of time
for the purpose of pollution abatement facilities or for the
application of solid wastes. The upper range of values presented in
Tables 77 through 86 assumes that cropland is taken out of production
(based on the assumptions presented previously in this section) and
assigns a cost for the leasing of this land.
236
-------
TABLE 85
ITEMIZED COST SUMMARY OF
ALTERNATIVE G FOR SUBCATE60RY III
Investment Costs
Items:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Aerated Lagoons
Pump, Sump, and Piping
Cane Wash Recirculation System
Lime Feed & Storage
Contingencies ,
Engineering
Total Cost
•$ 246,000
20,200
53,000
71,400
39,1.00
43,000
$ 472,700
Operating Costs
Items:
1. Aerated Lagoons O&M $ 18,800
2. Cane Wash Recirculation System O&M 23,400
3. Chemical Costs 84,300
4. Power Costs 35,900
Total Cost $ 162,000
Yearly Costs
Items:
1. Operating Cost
2. Investment Cost
3. Depreciation
Total Cost
$ 162,000
18,900
23,600
$ 205,000
Land:
$0-l,010/yr.
237
-------
TABLE 86
ITEMIZED COST SUMMARY OF
ALTERNATIVE H FOR SUBCATE60RY III
Investment Costs
Items:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Aerated Lagoons
Pump, Sump, and Piping
Barometric Condenser Cooling Water
Recirculation System
Contingencies
Engineering
Total Cost
$ 362,000
20,200
98,300
48,100
52.900
$ 582,000
Operating Costs
Items:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Aerated Lagoons O&M
B.C.C.W. Recirculation System O&M
Chemical Costs
Power Costs
Total Cost
$ 24,600
7,980
24,100
47,800
$ 104,500
Yearly Costs
Items: 1.
2.
3.
Operating Cost
Investment Cost
Depreciation
Total Cost
$ 104,500
23,300
29.100
$ 157,000
Land:
$0-2,270/yr.
238
-------
The lower range of costs corresponds to a second alternative that,
either: (1) land exists for pollution abatement purposes; (2) solid
wastes are disposed on land which is not suitable for growing cane,
such as rocky ground, dry gulches, or other unsuitable areas; or (3)
solid waste at low application rates is disposed on fields which are
to be plowed for new planting. This alternative would not involve the
incapacitation of cultivated cane growing areas and therefore, would
involve no cost associated with the leasing of land. It is possible
that with the proper planning and management, this alternative could
result in the reclamation of otherwise unsuitable land areas for use
as cropland. No credit has been given in this section for added value
associated with the reclamation of land.
The third alternative would include a combination of the above two
alternatives with some cropland being taken out of production. Based
on the assumptions presented previously in this section, the costs
associated with this alternative would lie within the range of values
presented in Tables 77 through 86.
A summary of the costs for all of the various alternatives is
presented in Table 87.
Related Energy. Requirements of Alternative Treatment and Control
Technologies for Subcateqgry III
Table 88 illustrates the estimated energy requirements for the
application of the various treatment alternatives- to the Subcategory
III model factory. Energy requirements in the form of electrical
energy needed for the operation of pumps, aerators, and spray nozzels,
and the energy required for the disposal of solid wastes is compared
to the overall energy requirements of the model factory. In order to
place the energy requirements of the various alternative^,in proper
perspective, it should be noted that a typical 3,340 metric tons
(3,675 tons) of net cane per day factory consumes 3.6 million
kilowatt-hours of electricity per year and requires 393 million
kilograms (864 million pounds) of steam per year. In the estimate of
total factory energy requirements, no allowance was made for usage of
fuel associated with the harvesting and transportation of sugarcane.
Therefore, the percentage increases in energy requirements presented
in Table 88 are considered to be the maximum requirements for the
application of the various treatment alternatives at the model
factory.
As shown in Table 88, the major uses of energy resulting from the
application of the various alternatives by Subcategory III factories
are aerated lagoons, activated sludge systems, and barometric
condenser cooling water recirculation systems. The highest energy use
alternatives are Alternatives D, E, F, G, and H which employ at least
one of these three higher energy demanding treatment techniques.
239
-------
TABLE 87
SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVE COSTS
MODEL FACTORY — SUBCATEGORY III
Alternative
A
B
C
D
5
F
6
H
BODS Loading*
(Fg/kkg)
12.3
10.0
10.0
0.83
0.57
0.50
0.39
0.23
TSS Loading*
(kg/kkg)
194
170
2.1
1.1
0.61
0.31
0.071
0.31
Total Investment
Cost
$ 118,000
610,000
2,200,000
3,380,000
4,960,000
447,000**
473,000**
582,000**
Total Yearly
Cost
$ 12,800
280,000
835,000
1,170,000
1,520,000
119,000**
205,000**
157,000**
*Net Cane Basis.
**Incremental, rather than total costs.
240
-------
TABLE 88
YEARLY ENERGY USAGE FOR MODEL FACTORY
SUBCATEGORY III
Alternative
A
A-l
B-l
B-2
B-3
C
D
E
F
G
H
Power Usage
(kw-hr/yr)
0
0
0
0
0
787,000
5,030,000
8,220,000
1,560,000
1,560,000
2,080,000
Gasoline Usage
(liters/yr)
0
0
40,900
40,900
189,000
498,000
498,000
521 ,000
339,000
339,000
339,000
Percent of Total
Energy Requirement
0%
0
0.125
0.125
0.58
2.16
5.63
8.23
2.28*
2.28
2.75
241
-------
SOBCATEGORY IV
A model factory representative of Subcategory IV factories was
developed in Section V and existing control and treatment was
established and considered as part of the model plant because of its
universal practice. As a result it was concluded in Section VII that
the model factory attains a certain level of treatment and that no
significant reduction benefits can be achieved by the application of
control and treatment schemes.
Cost and Reduction Benefits of Alternative Treatment and Control
Alternatives for Subcategory. IV ~
For the model factory developed as representative of Subcategory IV,
it is concluded that no further control and treatment is required to
achieve a zero discharge limitation and therefore no additional costs
of control and treatment are incurred.
Related Energy Requirements of Alternative Treatment and Control
Technologies for Subcategory. JIV ~"
Since no further control and treatment is required, no added energy
requirements are incurred.
SOBCATEGORY V
The model factory representative of Subcategory V factories was
developed in Section V and is similar in nature to the model factory
representative of Subcategory I factories. The same eight control and
treatment alternatives selected to be applied to the Subcategory I
model factory are selected as being applicable engineering
alternatives and are selected to be applied to the Subcategory V model
factory.
Cost and Reduction Eenefits of Alternative Treatment and Control
Technologies
In developing the costs of the various control and treatment
alternatives for Subcategory V, the following specific assumptions
were made:
1. All costs are based on those
changes listed below.
developed for Subcategory I with
2. There are 120 grinding days per year.
Alternative A - This alternative assumes no added treatment and
therefore no reduction in the waste load. It is estimated that the
effluent from a 2,730 metric tons (3,000 tons) of gross cane per day
242
-------
factory is 45,800 cubic meters (12.1 million gallons) per day. The
BOD5 waste loading is 2.08 kilograms per metric ton (4.16 pounds per
tonf of gross cane and the suspended solids loading is 17.56 kilograms
per metric ton (35.1 pounds per ton) of gross cane.
Costs: 0
Reduction Benefits: None
Alternative B - This alternative consists of adding those in-plant
modifications which may or may not be practiced at the individual
factories which would enable a factory to attain the level of
technplogy typified by the model factory. These procedures include
the dry hauling or impcundage of filter mud, the dry hauling or
impoundage of ash, and the addition of entrainment controls for
evaporators and vacuum pans. The following measures are taken to
achieve a reduction in sucrose entrainment into barometric condenser
cooling water:
- proper operation and good maintenance of entrainment controls
- improved baffling in evaporators and pans
- monitoring of barometric condenser cooling water
- increase vapor height in evaporators and pans
- addition of centrifugal separators to evaporators and pans
- addition of external separators for the last effect evaporators
Not all factories which experience high loses of sucrose into
barometric condenser cooling water would have to employ all of the
techniques listed above, but would in all probability utilize certain
of these procedures. The resulting BOD5 waste loading is 2.08
kilograms per metric ton (4.16 pounds per ton) of gross cane and the
suspended solids loading is 17.56 kilograms per metric ton (35.1
pounds per ton) of gross cane. «
Alternative B-l; Reduction of Entrainment into Barometric
Condenser Cooling Water.
Costs: Incremental Investment Cost:
Incremental Yearly Cost:
Sugar and Molasses Savings:
Alternative^B-2; Dry Hauling of Filter Cake.
Costs: Incremental Investment Cost:
Incremental Yearly Cost:
Alternative B-3: Impoundage of Filter Mud Slurry.
Costs: Incremental Investment Cost:
Incremental Yearly Cost:
$120,000
28,200
70,700
$37,800
26,100
$65,700
13,UOO
243
-------
Alternative B-4- Dry Hauling of Ash.
Costs: Incremental Investment Cost:
Incremental Yearly Cost:
Alternative B-5; Impoundage of Ash Slurry.
Costs: Incremental Investment Cost:
Incremental Yearly Cost:
$31,100
12,500
$57,500
11,600
Itemized cost breakdowns for Alternatives B-l through B-5 are presented
in Tables 89 through 93.
Reduction Benefits: The reduction benefits for Alternative B
involve BOD5 and suspended solids reductions
to the levels typified by the model plant.
Alternative C - This alternative involves the use of sedimentation
ponds to settle all of the waste water streams except barometric
condenser cooling water and excess condensate. The resulting BOD5
waste loading is 2.08 kilograms per metric ton (4.16 pounds per ton)
of gross cane and the suspended solids loading is 2.51 kilograms per
metric ton (5.02 pounds per ton) of gross cane.
Costs: Incremental Investment Cost
Incremental Yearly Cost
Total Investment cost
Total Yearly Cost
$ 75,700
40,000 - 106,000
$75,700
40,000 - 106,000
An itemized cost breakdown for Alternative C is presented in Table 94.
Reduction Benefits:
The reduction benefits for Alternative C
involve a suspended solids reduction of 85.7
percent. The incremental reductions due
to Alternative C are assumed to be 0.0
percent for BOD5 and 85.7 percent for
suspended solids.
Alternative D
- This alternative involves the treatment of the
effluent from the settling pond, discussed in Alternative C, in an
oxidation pond designed for total detention of the waste stream for
the entire grinding season. The resulting BOD5 loading is expected to
be less than 0.63 kilograms per metric ton (1.26 pounds per ton) of
gross cane and the suspended solids loading is expected to be less
than 0.47 kilograms per metric ton (0.94 pounds per ton) of gross
cane.
Costs: Incremental Investment Cost:
Incremental Yearly Cost:
590,000
74,600
244
-------
TABLE 89
ITEMIZED COST SUMMARY OF
ALTERNATIVE B-l FOR SUBCATEGORY V
Investment Costs
Items: 1. Improved Baffling $ 7,300
2. Monitoring Equipment 4,400
3. Increase Vapor Height 19,400
4. Centrifugal Separators For Evaporators 36,300
5. Centrifugal Separators For Pans 28,000
6. External Separators 24,200
Total Cost $119,600
Operating Costs
Items: 1. Operating and Maintenance $ 17,400
Total Cost $ 17,400
Yearly Costs
Items: 1. Operating Cost $ 17,400
,2. Investment Cost 4,780
3. Depreciation Cost 5,980
4. Annual Sugar and Molasses Savings (70,700)
Total Cost $(42,500)
245
-------
TABLE 90
ITEMIZED COST SUMMARY OF
ALTERNATIVE B-2 FOR SUBCATEGORY V
Investment Costs
Items: 1.
2.
Mud Storage Bin
Conveyor
Total Cost
$ 26,900
10.900
$ 37,800
Operating Costs
Items: 1. Operating & Maintenance
Total Cost
$ 22.700
$ 22,700
Yearly Costs
Items:
1. Operating Cost
2. Investment Cost
3. ^'Depreciation Cost
Total Cost
$ 22,700
1,500
1.900
$ 26,100
246
-------
TABLE 91
ITEMIZED COST SUMMARY OF
ALTERNATIVE B-3 FOR SUBCATEGORY V
Investment Costs
Items: 1. Pump, pipes, electrical
2. Pond (Installed)
3. Contingencies
4. Engineering
Total Cost
$ 12,000
42,300
5,430
5,970 •
$ 65,700
Operating Costs
Items: 1. Operating & Maintenance
2. Power
Total Cost
$ 7,170
300
$ 7,470
Yearly Costs
Items:
1. Operating Cost
2.- Investment Cost
3. Depreciation Cost
Total Cost
$ 7,470
2,630
3,290
$ 13,400
Land:
2.51 hectares
247
-------
TABLE 92
ITEMIZED COST SUMMARY OF
ALTERNATIVE B-4 FOR SUBCATEGORY V
Investment Costs
Items: 1. Ash Storage Bin
2. Conveyor
Total Cost
$ 20,200
10.900
$ 31,100
Operating Costs
Items: 1. Operating & Maintenance
Total Cost
$ 9.720
$ 9,720
Yearly Costs
Items: 1.
2.
3.
Operating Cost
Investment Cost
Depreciation Cost
Total Cost
$ 9,720
1,240
1,560
$ 12,500
248
-------
TABLE 93
ITEMIZED COST SUMMARY OF
ALTERNATIVE B-5 FOR SUBCATE60RY V
Investment Costs
Items: 1. Pump, pipes, electrical
2. Pond (Installed)
3. Contingencies
4. Engineering
Total Cost
$ 12,000
35,500
4,750
5,230
$ 57,500
Operating Costs
Items: 1. Operating & Maintenance
2. Power
Total Cost
$ 6,100
300
$ 6,400
Yearly Costs
Items:
1. Operating Cost
2. Investment Cost
3. Depreciation Cost
Total Cost
$ 6,400
2,300
2.900
$ 11,600
Land:
2.07 hectares
249
-------
TABLE 94
ITEMIZED COST SUMMARY OF
ALTERNATIVE C FOR SUBCATEGORY V
Investment Costs
Items: 1. Ponds
2. Contingencies
3. Engineering
Total Cost
$ 62,500
6,250
6,900
$ 75,700
Operating Costs
Items: 1. Maintenance
2. Solids Handling
Total Cost
$ 1,400
31.800 - 97.600
$ 33,200 - 99,000
Yearly Costs
Items: 1.
2.
3.
Operating Cost
Investment Cost
Depreciation Cost
Total Cost
$ 33,200 - 99,000
3,030
3.790
$ 40,000 -105,800
Land:
1.62 hectares
250
-------
Total Investment Cost:
Total Yearly Cost;
$666,000
115,000 - 181,000
An itemized cost breakdown for Alternative D is presented in Table 95.
Reduction Benefits: The reduction benefits for Alternative D in-
volve a BOD5 reduction of greater than 69.7
percent and a suspended solids reduction of
greater than 97.3 percent. The incremental
reductions due to Alternative D are 69.7
percent for BOD5 and 11.6 percent for
suspended solids.
Alternative—E_ - This alternative involves the treatment of the
effluent from the settling pond, discussed in Alternative C, in an
aerated lagoon designed with a quiescent zone and a total detention
time of 9.5 days. The resulting BODS loading is 0.63 kilograms per
metric ton (1.26 pounds per ton) of gross cane and the suspended
solids loading is 0.47 kilograms per metric ton (0.9U pounds per ton)
of gross cane.
Costs:
Incremental Investment Cost:
Incremental Yearly Cost
$393,000
65,000
Total Investment Cost:
Total Yearly cost:
$469,000
105,000 - 171,000
An itemized cost breakdown for Alternative E is presented in Table 96.
Reduction Benefits: The reduction benefits for Alternative E
involve a BOD5 reduction of 69.7 percent and
a suspended solids reduction of 97.3 percent.
The incremental reductions due to Alternative
. E are 69.7 percent for BOD5 and 11.6 percent
for suspended solids.
Alternative F_ ^ This alternative involves the use of a settling pond
to settle and recycle the cane wash water. The blowdown from the
recycle system is contained in an oxidation pond for the entire season
and discharged after the season to assure waste stabilization. The
resulting BOD5 waste loading is 0.53 kilograms per metric ton (1.06
pounds per ton) of gross cane and the suspended solids loading is
0.080 kilograms per metric ton (0.16 pounds per ton) of gross cane.
Costs: Incremental Investment Cost:
Incremental Yearly Cost:
Total Investment Cost:
Total Yearly Cost:
$221,000
86,300 - 165,000
$221,000
86,300 - 165,000
251
-------
TABLE 95
ITEMIZED COST SUMMARY OF
ALTERNATIVE D FOR SUBCATE60RY V
Investment Costs
Items: 1. Pond
2. Pump, Sump and Piping
3. Contingencies
4. Engineering
Total Cost
$ 479,000
8,600
48,800
53.600
$ 590,000
Operating Costs
Items
1.
2.
3.
Operation & Maintenance
Chemical Cost
Power Cost
Total Cost
$ 15,000
5,040
1,480
$ 21,500
Yearly Costs
Items: 1.
2.
3.
Operating Cost
Investment Cost
Depreciation Cost
Total Cost
$ 21,500
23,600
29,500
$ 74,600
Land:
142 hectares
252
-------
TABLE 96
ITEMIZED COST SUMMARY OF
ALTERNATIVE E FOR SUBCATEGORY V
Investment Costs ~
Items: 1. Aerated Lagoon
2. Pump, Sump and Piping
3. Contingencies
4. Engineering
Total Cost
$316,000
8,600
32,500
35,700.
$393,000
Operating Costs
Items:
1.
2.
3.
Operation & Maintenance
Chemical Cost
Power Cost
Total Cost
$ 13,100
5,040
11.500
$ 29,600
Yearly Costs
Items: 1.
2.
3.
Operating Cost
Investment Cost
Depreciation Cost
Total Cost
$ 29,600
15%700
19.700
$ 65,000
Land:
5.3 hectares
253
-------
An itemized cost breakdown for Alternative F is presented in Table 97.
Reduction Benefits: The reduction benefits for Alternative F in-
volve, a BOD5 reduction of 74.5 percent and a
suspended solids reduction of 99.5 percent.
The incremental reductions due to Alternative
F are 74.5 percent for BOD5 and 99.5 percent
for suspended solids.
Alternative G - This alternative involves the recycle of barometric
condenser cooling water and cane wash water. The blowdown from the
barometric condenser cooling water recycle system is assumed to be the
makeup to the cane wash recirculation system. The blowdown from the
cane wash recirculation system and the miscellaneous waste streams are
treated in an oxidation pond, designed with a detention time
equivalent to the entire season, and discharged after stabilization.
The resulting BOD5 waste loading is 0.050 kilograms per metric ton
(0. 10 pounds per ton) of gross cane and the suspended solids loading
is 0.080 kilograms per metric ton {0.16 pounds per ton) of gross cane.
Costs: Incremental Investment cost:
Incremental Yearly Cost:
Total Investment Cost:
Total Yearly Cost:
$ 410,000
126,000 - 205,000
$410,000
126,000 - 205,000
An itemized cost breakdown for Alternative G is presented in Table 98.
Reduction Benefits: The reduction benefits for Alternative G
involve a BOD5 reduction of 97.6 percent
and a suspended solids reduction of 99.5
percent. The incremental reductions due
to Alternative G are 97.6 percent for BOD5
and 99.5 percent for suspended solids.
Alternative H - This alternative involves the recycle of barometric
condenser cooling and cane wash water. The blowdown from the
barometric condenser cooling water water recirculation system is
assumed to be the makeup to the cane wash recycle system. The
blowdown from the cane wash recirculation system and the miscellaneous
waste streams are treated in two aerated lagoons operated in series,
designed with a total detention time of 28 days and with a quiescent
zone. The resulting BOD5 waste loading is 0.050 kilograms per metric
ton (0.10 pounds per ten) of gross cane and the suspended solids
loading is 0.080 kilograms per metric ton (0.16 pounds per ton) of
gross cane.
Costs: Incremental Investment Cost:
Incremental Yearly Cost:
$525,000
167,000 - 246,000
254
-------
TABLE 97
ITEMIZED COST SUMMARY OF
ALTERNATIVE F FOR SUBCATEGORY V
Investment Costs
.Items:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5,
Settling Ponds
Cane Wash Recycle System
Oxidation Pond
Contingencies
Engineering
Total Cost
$ 62,500
60,700
59,100
18,200
20.100
$221,000
Operating Costs
Items:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Settling Pond Maintenance
Cane Wash Recycle Maintenance
Oxidation Pond Maintenance
Power Cost
Total Cost
$ 39,500
19,900
5,700
1,250
- 118,000
$ 66,400 - 144,900
Yearly Costs
Items: 1.
2.
3.
Operating Cost
Investment Cost
Depreciation Cost
Total Cost
$ 66,400
8,800
11,100
- 144,900
$ 86,300 - 164,800
Land:
9.8 hectares
255
-------
TABLE 98
ITEMIZED COST SUMMARY OF
ALTERNATIVE G FOR SUBCATEGORY V
Investment Costs
Items: 1. Settling Ponds
2. Cane Wash Recycle System
3. Barometric Condenser Cooling
Water Recirculation System
4. Oxidation Pond
5. Contingencies
6. Engineering
Total Cost
$ 62,500
60,700
155,000
60,300
33,900
37,200
$410,000
Operating Costs
Items;
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Settling Pond Maintenance
Cane Wash Recycle Maintenance
Condenser Recirculation Maintenance
& Operation
Oxidation Pond Maintenance
Power Cost
Total Cost
$ 39,500 - 118,000
19,900
12,800
5,700
11.400
$ 89,300 - 168,000
Yearly Costs
Items:
"1:
2.
3.
Operating Cost
Investment Cost
Depreciation Cost
Total Cost
$ 89,300 - 168,000
16,400
20.500
$126,000 - 205,000
Land:
10,3 hectares
256
-------
Total Investment Cost:
Total Yearly Cost:
$525,000
167,000 - 246,000
An itemized cost breakdown for Alternative H is presented in Table 99.
Reduction Benefits:
The reduction benefits for Alternative H in-
volve a BODJ5 reduction of 97.6 percent and a
suspended solids reduction of 99.5 percent.
The incremental reductions due to Alternative
H are 97.6 percent for BOD5 and 99.5 percent
for suspended solids.
A summary of the costs for all of the alternatives is presented in Table
100.
Related Energy
Technologies for Sub'
•i§ of Alternative Treatment and Control
egory. V
Table 101 illustrates the estimated energy requirements for the
application of the various treatment alternatives to the Subcategory V
model factory. Energy requirements in the form of electrical energy
needed for the operation of pumps, aerators, and spray nozzels, and
the energy required for the disposal of solid wastes is compared to
the overall energy requirements of the model factory. In order to
place the energy requirements of the various alternatives in proper
perspective, it should be noted that a typica"! 2,730 metric tons
(3,000 tons) of gross cane per day factory consumes S.U million
kilowatt-hours of electricity per year and requires 189 million
kilograms (415 million pounds) of steam per year. In the estimate of
total factory energy requirements, no allowance was made for usage of
fuel associated with the harvesting and transportation of * sugarcane.
Therefore, the percentage increases in energy requirements presented
in Table 101 are considered to be the maximum requirements for the
application of the various treatment alternatives at the model
factory.
As shown in Table 101, the two major uses of energy resulting from the
application of the various treatment alternatives by Subcategory I
factories are the recirculation of barometric condenser cooling water
and the use of aerated lagoons as a treatment method. Alternatives E,
G, and H require substantially greater energy usage than the: other
alternatives. Of these alternatives. Alternative H employs both a
barometric condenser cooling water recirculation system and an aerated
lagoon and would be the largest user of energy.
257
-------
TABLE 99
ITEMIZED COST SUMMARY OF
ALTERNATIVE H FOR SUBCATEGORY V
Investment Costs
Items: 1. Settling Ponds
2. Cane Wash Recycle System
3. Barometric Condenser Cooling Water
Recirculated System
4. Aerated Lagoon
5. Contingencies
6. Engineering
Total Cost
$ 62,500
60,700
155,000
155,700
43,400
47.700
$525,000
Operating Costs
Items:
1,
2.
3.
Settling Pond Maintenance
Cane Wash Recycle Maintenance
Condenser Recirculation Maintenance
& Operation
Aerated Lagoon Maintenance
& Operation
Power Requirements
Total Cost
$ 39,500 - 118,000
19,900
12,800
/16,200
31.800
$120,000 - 199,000
Yearly Costs
Items:' 1.
2.
3.
Operating Cost
Investment Cost
Depreciation Cost
Total Cost
$120,000 - 199,000
21,000
26.300
$167,000 - 246,000
Land:
2.8 hectares
258
-------
TABLE TOO
SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVE COSTS
MODEL FACTORY — SUBCATEGORY V
Alternative
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
BODS Loading*
(Fg/kkg)
2.08
2.08
2.08
0.63
0.63
0.53
0.050
0.050
TSS Loading*
(kg/kkg)
17.56
17.56
2.51
0.47
0.47
0.080
0.080
0.080
total Investment
Cost
$ 0
189,000
75,700
666,000
469 ,000
; 221 ,000
410,000
525,000
Total Yearly
Cost
$ • 0
(3,900)
40,000-106,000
115,000-181,000
105,000-171,000
86,300-165,000
126,000-205,000
167,000-246,000
*6ross Cane Basis.
259
-------
TABLE 101
YEARLY ENERGY USAGE FOR MODEL FACTORY
SUBCATEGORY V
Alternative
A
B-l
B-2
B-3
B-4
B-5
C
D
E
F
G
H
Power Usage
(kw-hr/yr)
0
0
0
13,000
. 0
13,000
0
64,300
500,000
54,300
496,000
1,380,000
Gasoline Usage
(liters/yr)
0
0
5,680
0
1,820
0
5,680-37,900
5,680-37,900
5,680-37,900
6,810-45,400
6,810-45,400
6,810-45,400
Percent of Total
Energy Requirement
0%
0
0.035
0.021
0.011
0.021
0.035-0.23
0.14 -0.33
0.84 -1.06
0.13 -0.36
0.84 -1.07
2.24 -2.47
260
-------
NON-WATER DUALITY ASPECTS OF ALTERNATIVE TREATMENT AND CONTROL
TECHNOLOGY
The non-water quality aspects associated with the application of the
various alternative control and treatment technologies are considered
below. In general, the impact of aesthetic considerations, including
the sight of treatment facilities as well as odor and noise effects,
are minimized by the typical location of cane sugar factories away
from urban areas.
Air Pollution
Waste water lagooning, particularly under anaerobic conditions, can
promote the growth of sulfur reducing organisms and associated noxious
gasses. Aerobic conditions can be maintained by the design of shallow
ponds, by the use of aerators, by pH adjustment, or by other means.
Spray drift from cooling ponds can cause problems in congested areas.
Proper location of cooling devices, with regard to prevailing winds
and to the uses of surrounding land, can be employed to minimize the
effects of drift. The use of warm water for cane washing could cause
fogging problems during certain weather conditions and could possibly
contribute to unsafe working conditions. Recirculation systems could
be employed which would minimize potential fogging problems.
Noise
There is little if any noise pollution associated with the control and
treatment technologies discussed in this document.
Solid Waste
•*,
The removal of solids from waste water produces a solid waste disposal
problem in the form of sludges. In those cases where sludge is to be
impounded, previously discussed measures for protection of groundwater
should be observed. Sanitary landfills, when available, usually offer
an economic solution if hauling distances are reasonable. Land is
usually available for land spreading of sludges, and in the case of
some areas in Hawaii and particularly in Florida, the rapid loss of
top soil makes the return of organics to the soil a highly desirable
practice.
In any event, the additional solid wastes produced by the various con-
trol and treatment alternatives are not expected to be a serious
problem. The costs associated with their handling and disposal have
been taken into account in Section VIII, and technology is available
to prevent harmful effects to the environment as a result of land
disposal of sludge.
261
-------
For those waste materials considered to be non-hazardous where land
disposal is the choice for disposal, practices similar to proper
sanitary landfill technology may be followed. The principles set
forth in the EPA's Land Disposal of Solid Wastes Guidelines (CFR Title
HO, Chapter 1; Part 241) may be used as guidance for acceptable land
disposal techniques.
For those waste materials considered to be hazardous, disposal will
require ^special precautions. In order to ensure long-term protection
of public health and the environment, special preparation and
pretreatment may be required prior to disposal. If land disposal is
to be practiced, these sites must not allow movement of pollutants
such as fluoride and radium-226 to either ground or surface water.
Sites should be selected that have natural soil and geological
conditions to prevent such contamination or, if such conditions do not
exist, -artificial means (e.g., liners) must be provided to ensure
long-term protection of the environment from hazardous materials.
Where appropriate, the location of solid hazardous materials disposal
sites should be permanently recorded in the appropriate office of the
legal jurisdiction in which the site is located. It should be noted
that there is no evidence that hazardous materials are present in the
slurries, sludges, muds, ashes, and cakes which result from-the
processing of sugarcane into a raw sugar product.
262
-------
SECTION IX
EFFLUENT REDUCTION ATTAINABLE THROUGH THE APPLICATION OF
THE BEST PRACTICABLE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY CURRENTLY AVAILABLE
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS GUIDELINES
INTRODUCTION
The effluent limitations which must be achieved by July 1, 1977, are
to specify the degree of effluent reduction attainable through the
application of the best practicable control technology currently
available. Best practicable control technology currently available is
generally based upon the average of best existing performance by
plants of various sizes, ages and unit processes within the industrial
category and/or subcategory.
Consideration must also be given to:
a. The total cost of application of technology in relation to
the effluent reduction benefits to be achieved from such
application;
b. The size and age of equipment and facilities involved;
c. The process employed;
d. The engineering aspects of the application of various
types of control techniques;
e. Process changes;
f. Non-water quality environmental impact (including
energy requirements).
Best practicable control technology currently available emphasizes
treatment facilities at the end of a manufacturing process but
includes the control technologies within the process itself when these
are considered to be normal practice within the industry.
A further consideration is the degree of economic and engineering
reliability which must be established for the technology to be
"currently available." As a result of demonstration projects, pilot
plants, and general use, there must exist a high degree of confidence
in the engineering and economic practicability of the technology at
the time of construction or installation of the control facilities.
263
-------
EFFLUENT REDUCTIONS ATTAINABLE THROUGH THE APPLICATION OF BEST
PRACTICABLE CCNTROL TECHNOLOGY CURRENTLY AyAI^BLE~FOR~~THE~ RAW CANE
SUGAR SEGMENT OF THE SUGAR PROCESSING PCINT SOURCE CATEGORY
Based upon the information contained in Sections III through VIII of
this document it has been determined that the degree of effluent
reduction attainable through the application of the best practicable
control technology currently available is as follows-
30-Day
Daily
Average
I (Subpart D)
II(Subpart E)
III(Subpart F)
IV(Subpart G)
V(Subpart H) 0.63 0.47
!OD5
0.63
0
-
0
TSS
0.47
0
2.1
0
BOD5
1.14
0
-
0
TSS
1.41
0
4.2
0
1.14
1.41
The above recommendations are expressed in terms of kilograms of
pollutant per metric ton of gross cane, except for Sufccategory in
which are expressed in terms of kilograms of pollutant per metric ton
of net cane, and are subject to the following qualifications:
It is recommended that the factories of Subcategory II (those
factories located in Florida and Texas) and Subcategory IV (those
factories located in Hawaii but not on the Hilo-Hamakua coast of the
island of Hawaii) be required to attain the level of no discharge of
polluted waste water to navigable waters in that under normal
operating conditions this limitation is readily attainable and is in
fact being achieved by the factories which form these subcategories.
It is further recommended that discharge of factory waste waters to
navigable waters be allowed during the occurrence of rainfall events
that cause an overflow of process waste water from a facility
designed, constructed, and operated to contain all process generated
WclStG Welt63TS •
It is also recommended that for all cases for which a discharge of
waste waters is allowed, the PH of the waste waters be required to be
maintained in the range of 6.0 to 9.0.
264
-------
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS GUIDELINES DEVELOPMENT
For the purpose of establishing uniform national effluent limitations
and guidelines, model factories were hypothesized which represent the
various subcategories of the raw cane sugar processing segment of the
sugar processing category. Treatment technologies were considered
which are applicable to all factories within each of the various
subcategories. These technologies can be applied to treat the unit
raw waste loadings of the various waste water discharge streams
existent at raw cane sugar factories. An average rather than an
exemplary plant approach has been taken in the determination of unit
water usages and effluent raw waste loadings on which to base
attainable effluent reductions and costs associated with the
application of the various control and treatment technologies.
It is felt that the effluent limitations and guidelines presented in
this section are reasonable and technically achievable through the
application of improved in-plant controls and the addition of an
appropriate treatment system to treat the process generated waste
water discharge streams.
Establishment of Daily Average Effluent Limitations. The ratios of
the daily maximum to 30-day average limitations are based upon
statistical analyses of available data and analyses of the results of
treatment systems operating on wastes similar in nature to those
associated with the production of raw cane sugar.
Production Basis. The average permitted effluent level should be the
recommended level, expressed as kg/kkg (Ib/ton), multiplied by the
present daily processing rate, expressed as kkg (ton) per day. It is
recommended that the processing rate be based on the highest
processing rate attained over five (5) consecutive «days (not
necessarily continuous) of full normal production. It is recommended
that the processing rate on which the effluent limitations are based
should be one-fifth (1/5) of the maximum five day total production
rate.
IDENTIFICATION OF BEST PRACTICABLE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY CURRENTLY
AVAILABLE '
The technology identified as the best practicable control technology
currently available is defined as follows for each subcategory:
Subcatecrory I
The best practicable control technology currently available for
Subcategory I is identified as the use of in-plant controls to the
extent typified by general operating practice (such as the use of
entrainment prevention devices to reduce the degree of entrainment of
sucrose into barometric condenser cooling water and the elimination of
265
-------
the discharge of filter cake and boiler ash), the use of settling
ponds to remove solids from cane wash water, and the use of a
biological treatment system to treat the effluent from the settling
ponds and all other waste streams except barometric condenser cooling
water and excess condensate.
Subcategories II and IV
The best practicable control technology currently available for
Subcategories II and IV is identified as the containment of all waste
waters except when rainfall events cause an overflow of process waste
water from a facility designed, constructed, and operated to contain
all process generated waste waters.
Subcategory III
The best practicable control technology currently available for
Subcategory III is identified as the use of in-plant controls and
clarification of the entire waste stream (except barometric condenser
cooling water and excess condensate) with polymer addition.
Subcategory V
That portion of the industry segment comprising Subcategory V is in a
state of flux between the hand harvesting of sugarcane and an
increased reliance on mechanical harvesting techniques. However,
since available data indicate raw waste loadings on the order of those
exhibited by Subcategory I factories it is concluded that the
technology described above for Subcategory I is directly applicable to
Subcategory V.
ENGINEERING ASPECTS OF CONTROL TECHNOLOGY APPLICATIONS
With the exception of polymer addition, all technology discussed in
this section is existing technology within the industry segment.
Polymer addition, as discussed in Section VII, Control and Treatment
Technology, has been well demonstrated by the Hawaiian cane sugar
industry to be a practical and available technique, in general, then,
the concepts discussed herein are proven, available for implementation
prior to July 1, 1977, and may be readily utilized by the industry.
COSTS OF APPLICATION
The costs of attaining the effluent reductions set forth herein are
summarized in Section VIII, Cost^ Energy^,, and Non-Water Quality
Aspects. ~ ~
The capital and total yearly costs (August-1971 dollars) to the raw
cane sugar processing segment of the sugar processing category to
achieve the best practicable control technology currently available
266
-------
effluent limitations are estimated to range from between $9.52 and
$10.Ul million, and $2.98 and $U.06 irillion, respectively. These
total costs are based on an estimation of those control and treatment
techniques which must be applied at each of the seventy-six individual
cane sugar factories to achieve the effluent limitations. These costs
do not include expenses already incurred as a result of pollution
abatement facilities already existent at the individual factories.
NON-WATER QUALITY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
The primary non-water quality environmental impacts are summarized in
Section VIII, Cost,, Energy^ and Non-Water Quality. Aspects. A major
concern is that in those cases where a strong reliance is placed upon
the land for ultimate disposal of wastes, no resulting ground-water
pollution should be allowed. Technology is available to ensure that
land disposal systems are maintained commensurate with soil tolerances
and to prevent groundwater contamination.
Of additional concern is the generation cf solid wastes in the form of
sludges and muds and the possibility of odors resulting from
impoundage lagoons. In both cases, responsible operation and
maintenance procedures coupled with sound environmental planning have
been shown to obviate the problems.
FACTORS TO BE CONSIDERED IN APPLYING EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
The above assessment of what constitutes the best "practicable control
technology currently available is predicated on the assumption of a
degree of uniformity among factories within each subcategory that
strictly speaking, does not exist. The control technologies described
herein have been formulated partly as a function of general land
availability within each subcategory. In many cases, tfle degree of
land availability may dictate that an individual factory employ one
treatment alternative over another.
A second factor that must be considered, particularly with regard to
Subcategories I and V, is the impact of the discharge from
stabilization ponds; i.e., , the allowable rate of discharge from the
ponds at the time they are drained.
267
-------
-------
SECTION X
EFFLUENT REDUCTION ATTAINABLE THROUGH THE APPLICATION OF
THE BEST AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGY ECONOMICALLY ACHIEVABLE
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS GUIDELINES
INTRODUCTION
The effluent limitations which must be achieved by July 1, 1983, are
to specify the degree of effluent reduction attainable through the
application of the best available technology economically achievable.
The best available technology economically achievable is not based
upon an average of the best performance within an industrial category,
but is to be determined by identifying the very best control and
treatment technology employed by a specific point source within the
industrial category or subcategory, or where it is readily trans-
ferable from one industrial process to another. A specific finding
must be made as to the availability of control measures and practices
to eliminate the discharge of pollutants, taking into account the cost
of such elimination.
Consideration must also be given to:
a. The age of equipment and facilities involved;
b. The process employed;
c. The engineering aspects of the application of various types of
control techniques;
d. Process change; *
e. Cost of achieving the effluent reduction resulting from
application of the best economically achievable technology;
f. Non-water
requirements) .
quality environmental impact (including energy
In contrast to the best practicable control technology currently
available, the best economically achievable technology assesses the
availability in all cases of in-process controls as well as control or
additional treatment techniques employed at the end of a production
process.
Those plant processes and control technologies which at the pilot
plant semi-works, or other level, have demonstrated both technological
performances and economic viability at a level sufficient to
reasonably justify investing in such facilities may be considered in
assessing the best available economically achievable technology. The
269
-------
best available technology economically achievable is the highest
degree of control technology that has been achieved or has been
demonstrated to be capable of being designed for plant scale operation
up to and including "no discharge" of pollutants. Although economic
factors are considered in this development, the costs for this level
of control are intended to be the top-of-the-line of current
technology subject to limitations imposed by economic and engineering
feasibility. However, the best available technology economically
achievable may be characterized by some technical risk with respect to
performance and with respect to certainty of costs. Therefore, the
best available technology economically achievable may necessitate some
industrially sponsored development work prior to its application.
EFFLUENT REDUCTION ATTAINABLE THROUGH THE APPLICATION OF THE BEST
AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGY ECONOMICALLY ACHlIvABLE — EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
GUIDELINES ±Afi±ASS!S
Based upon the information contained in Sections III through VIII of
this document, it has been determined that the degree of effluent
reduction attainable through the application of the best available
technology economically achievable is as follows:
30-Day
Average
Subcateqory BOJD5 TSS
I(Subpart D) 0.050 0.080
II(Subpart E ) 0 0
III(Subpart F)
IV(Subpart G) 0 0
V(Subpart H) 0.050 0.080
Daily
BOD5
The greater of: The greater of:
0.11 or 0.13 or
0.76(l-x)+0.0060 1.01(l-x)+0.0080
The greater of:
0.22 or
1.52(1-50+0.012
0.10
e
TSS
0.24
0
The greater of:
0.39 or
3.03(1-30+0.024
0.24
The above recommendations are expressed in terms of kilograms of
pollutant per metric ton of field cane processed, except for
Subcategory III which are expressed as kilograms of pollutant per
metric ton of net cane processed, and are subject to the same
qualifications listed in Section IX.
It is also recommended that for all cases for which a discharge of
waste waters is allowed, the pH of the waste waters be required to be
maintained in the range of 6.0 to 9.0.
270
-------
IDENTIFICATION OF THE BEST AVAILABLE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY ECONOMICALLY
ACHIEVABLE
The technology identified as the best available technology
economically achievable is defined as follows for each subcategory:
Subcategory I
The best available technology economically achievable for Subcategory
I is identified as the recycle of barometric condenser cooling water
and cane wash water with biological treatment of the blowdown and
miscellaneous waste streams.
Subcategories II and IV
The best available technology economically achievable for
Subcategories II and IV is identified as being equivalent to the best
practicable control technology currently available.
Subcategory III
The best available technology economically achievable for Subcategory
III is identified as the addition of a barometric condenser cooling
water recirculation system, the blowdown used as makeup to the cane
wash system. The entire clarified stream would then be treated in a
biological treatment system.
Subcategory. _V
The best available technology economically achievable for Subcategory
V is the same as that identified in this section for Subca€egory I,
ENGINEERING ASPECTS OF CONTROL TECHNOLOGY APPLICATIONS
The engineering aspects of this level of control and treatment
technology are the same as discussed in Section IX, and also include
the assumption that for Subcategory III factories, a fraction of the
net sugarcane harvested will be harvested by the advanced harvesting
systems. These systems are available at the present time and are
expected to be the general operating procedure at Subcategory III
factories between 1977 and 1983.
COSTS QF^APPLICATIQN
The additional capital and total yearly costs (August-1971 dollars) to
the raw cane sugar processing segment of the sugar processing category
to achieve the best available technology economically achievable
effluent limitations are estimated to range from between $6.05 and
$7.53 million, and $1.02 and $1.33 million, respectively. This
271
-------
estimate of total costs does not include those costs associated with
attainment of the best practicable control technology currently
available and is based on an estimation of those control and treatment
techniques which must be applied at each individual factory in order
that the effluent limitations be attained. These costs do not include
those expenses already incurred as a result of pollution abatement
facilities already existent at the individual, factories.
NON-HATER QUALITY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
The non-water quality environmental impact of this level of technology
is the same as that discussed in Section IX.
FACTORS TO BE CONSIDERED IN APPLYING EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
The factors to be.considered in applying effluent limitations are the
same as those discussed in Section IX.
272
-------
SECTION XI
NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
INTRODUCTION
In addition to effluent limitations and guidelines reflecting the best
practicable control technology currently available and the best
available technology economically achievable, applicable to existing
point source discharges on July Ir 1977, and July 1, 1983,
respectively, the Act requires that performance standards be
established for new sources. The term "new source" is defined in the
Act to mean "any source, the construction of which is commenced after
the publication of proposed regulations prescribing a standard of
performance." New source technology shall be evaluated by adding to
the consideration underlying the identification of best available
technology economically achievable a determination of what higher
levels of pollution control are available through the use of improved
production processes and/or treatment techniques.
New source performance standards may be based on the best in-plant and
end-of-process control technology identified. Additional
considerations applicable to new source performance standards take
into account techniques for reducing the level of effluent by changing
the production process itself or adopting alternative processes,
operating methods, or other alternatives. The end result of the
analysis will be the identification of effluent standards which
reflect levels of control achievable through the use of improved pro-
duction processes (as well as control technology), rather than pre-
scribing a particular type of process or technology which must be em-
ployed. A further determination which must be made fo£ new source
technology is whether a standard permitting no discharge of pollutants
is practicable.
At least the following factors should be considered with respect to
production processes which are to be analyzed in assessing technology
applied to new sources:
a. The type of process employed and process changes;
b. Operating methods;
c. Batch as opposed to continuous operations;
d. Use of alternative raw materials and mixes of raw materials;
273
-------
e. Use of dry rather than wet processes
recoverable solvents for water) ; and
f . Recovery of pollutants as by-products.
(including substitution of
NEW
STANDARDS
Based upon the information contained in Sections III through VIII of
this document, it has teen determined that the degree of effluent re-
duction attainable for new sources in Subcategories I, II, III, IV,
and V is the same as that identified as attainable by the application
of the best available technology economically achievable.
PRETREATMENT CONSIDERATIONS
Effluents from cane sugar factories contain no constituents that are
known to be incompatible with a well-designed and operated municipal
waste water treatment plant nor any that would pass through such a
system. In general, municipal treatment facilities are not available
because cane sugar factories are located in rural areas. In the event
that municipal sewers do become available to factories, introduction
of factory waste waters should result in no treatability problems.
Contributions of solids attributable to waste waters discharged by a
cane sugar factory could be substantial. A judgment should be made on
an individual basis as to the amount of solids which should be allowed
to enter a particular municipal treatment system. Consideration
should be given to the existing municipal load and total capacity. If
it is determined that pretreatment for solids removal is necessary,
primary settling should be provided at the cane sugar factory.
Where acid and caustic wastes are discharged, these should be held and
discharged in such a way as to maintain the pH of the discharge to
municipal sewers between 6 and 9.
274
-------
SECTION XII
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The Environmental Protection Agency wishes to acknowledge the
contributions to the project by Environmental Science and Engineering,
Inc. (ESE), of Gainesville, Florida. Dr. Richard H. Jones, Project
Director, Mr. John D. Crane, Project Manager, and Mr. Robert A.
Morrell, Assistant Project Manager, of ESE, with the able assistance
of F. C. Schaffer and Associates, Inc. (FCS), of Baton Rouge,
Louisiana, Sunn, Low, Tom and Kara, Inc. (SLTH) , of Honolulu, Hawaii,
and Reynolds, Smith and Hills (RSSH), of Jacksonville, Florida,
conducted the detailed technical study and drafted the initial report
on which this document is based.
Assistance was also provided by the American Sugar Cane League, the
Florida Sugar Cane League, the Hawaiian Sugar Planters1 Association
(HSPA), and the Puerto Rican Land Administration. Specific
appreciation is expressed to Mr. Horace D. Godfrey, Mr. Charles J.
Schiele, Mr. Edward J. Lui, Mr. Q. Dick Stephen-Hassard, and Mr.
William M. Requa of the above organizations.
Acknowledgment is also due to a number of plant managers and engineers
and other officials of the industry without whose cooperation and
assistance in site visitations and information gathering, the
completion of this project would not have been possible.
Appreciation is expressed to those in the Environmental Protection
Agency who assisted in the performance of the project: Kenneth
Dostal, NERC, Corvallis; Erik Krabbe, Region II; Edmund Struzeski,
NFIC, Denver; Karl Johnson, ORAP, Headquarters; Judith Nelson, OP&E,
Headquarters; Maria Mykolenko, OP&E, Headquarters; George Keeler,
OR&D, Headquarters; Allen Abramson and Kenneth Biggus, Region IX;
Allen Cywin, Ernst P. Hall, Ronald J, McSwinney, George R. Webster,
John E. Riley, Richard V. Watkins, Dr. Richard T. Gregg, Richard J.
Kinch, Jane D. Mitchell, and Barbara J. Wortman, Effluent Guidelines
Division; and many others in the EPA regional offices and research
centers who assisted in providing information and assistance to the
project.
275
-------
-------
SECTION XIII
REFERENCES
1. Standard Industrial Classification Manual, Executive Office of
the President, Office of Management and Budget, 1972 (USGPO,
Stock No. 4101-0066).
2. Biaggi, N., "The Sugar Industry in Puerto Rico and its Relation
to the Industrial Waste Problem", Journal Water Pollution Control
Federation, 40, 8, August 1968. ~ ~
3. Hendrickson, E. R., and Grillot, Jr., F. A., "Raw Sugar Factory
Wastes and Their Control".
4. Spencer, G. L., and Meade, G. P., Cane Sugar Handbook, Ninth
Edition, John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1964. ~
5. Keller, A. G., and Huckabay, H. K., "Pollution Abatement in the
Sugar Industry of Louisiana", Journal Water Pollution Control
IS^erationt 37, 7, July 1960. ~ ~ ~
6. "Hawaii Sugar Industry Waste Study", USEPA, Region IX, San
Francisco, California, June, 1971.
7- An Industrial Waste Guide to the Cane Sugar Industry, U.S.
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare," Public Health
Service Publication 691, Washington, D. C., 1963.
8. "Report on the Sugar Refineries and Factories of Louisiana-1973
Season", Division of water Pollution Control, Louisiana Wildlife
and Fisheries Commission, 1974.
9. Middleton, F. H., et al., Dry, Versus Wet Cane Cleaning at
Laupahoehoe Sugar Company., Proceedings of the 13th Congress of
the International Society of Sugar Cane Technologists, 1969.
10. Kenda, Wm., and Stephen-Hassard, Q. Dick, "A Systems Approach to
Effluent Abatement by Hawaii's Sugar Cane Industry", Proceedings
Fourth National Symposium on Food Processing Wastes,
Environmental Protection Technology Series, EPA 660/2-73-031,
December, 1973.
11. Serner, H. E., "Entrainment in Vacuum Pans", Sugar y, Azucar,
January, 1969.
12. Comparison of Barometric and Surface Condensers, Unpublished
paper by the U.S. Cane Sugar Refiners' Association, March 9,
1973.
277
-------
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
Chen, J. C. P., et al., "Handling of Sugar Factory Waste
Streams", Southdown Sugar Factories and Refinery, Louisiana.
Wheeler, J. E., Jr., An Engineering Study, of the Effluent
Disposal Problems of the Louisiana Raw Sugar Industry, Louisiana
State University, Ph.D., 1959. ~
1971 Factory Report, Factory Report '77, Sugar Technology
Department, Hawaiian Sugar Planters' Association, August, 1972.
Ekern, P. C., Consumptive Use of Water by. Sugar Cane in Hawaii,
Water Resources Research Center, Technical Report No. 37,
University of Hawaii, 1970.
"Draft Proposed Effluent Limitations for the Hawaiian Cane Sugar
Industry", Sunn, Low, Tom & Kara, Inc., May, 1973.
Guzman, Ramon M., "Control of Cane Sugar Wastes in Puerto Rico,"
Journal Water Pollution Control Federation, 34, 12, December,
1962. ~~
Complete Mix Activated Sludge Treatment of Citrus Process Wastes,
Environmental Protection Agency, Water Pollution Control Research
Series 12060 EZY, August 1971.
Treatment of Citrus Processing Wastes, Environmental Protection
Agency, Water Pollution Control Research series 12060, October,
1970.
Bhaskaran, T.R., and Chakrabarty, R.N., "Pilot Plant for
Treatment of Cane Sugar Waste", Journal Water Pollution Control
Federation, July, 1966. "
Miller," J.R., "Treatment of Effluent from Raw Sugar
Proceedings of the International Society of
Technologists, 1969.
Factories",
Sugar Cane
State-of-Art, Sugarbeet Processing Waste Treatment, Environmental
Protection Agency, Water Pollution Control Research Series 12060
DSI, July, 1971.
Simpson, D.E. and Hemens, J., Sugar Mill Effluent Treatment With
Nutrient Addition, Journal Water Pollution Control Federation,
45, 10, October~1973.
Bevan, D., The Disposal of Sugar Mill Effluents in Queensland,
Sugar Research Institute. ~
278
-------
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37,
"Wastewater Management Alternatives and Functional Design of
Recommended Wastewater Treatment Facilities at Pepeekeo", Sunn,
Low, Tom S Kara, Inc., March, 1973.
"Evaluation of Process Objectives and Pilot Plant Investigation
of Tube Settler Clarification and Vacuum Filter Sludge
Dewatering", Sunn, Low, Tom & Hara, Inc., January, 1972.
"Report of All Sugar Mills in the State of Louisiana - 1970
Grinding Season", Division of Water Pollution Control, Louisiana
Wildlife and Fisheries Commission, 1971.
"Water Quality Criteria 1972", National Academy of Sciences and
National Academy of Engineering for the Environmental Protection
Agency, Washington, D. C., 1972 (U.S. Government Printing Office,
Stock No. 5501-00520). . .
Technical Paper No., ^0, "Rainfall Frequency Atlas of the United
States", U.S. Department of Commerce, May, 1961.
Engineering Field Manual, Soil Conservation
Department of Agriculture, 1971.
Service, U.S.
"Policy on Subsurface Emplacement of Fluids by Well Injection", A
Policy Statement issued by the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency with Accompanying "Recommended Data Requirements for
Environmental Evaluation of Subsurface Emplacement of Fluids by
Well Injection", Washington, D. C. February, 1973.
Public Health Service Drinking water Standards, Revised 1962,
U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, U.S. Public
Health Service Publication 956, Washington, D. C., 1962.
Oahu Water Quality Program, Prepared for the City and County of
Honolulu, Department of Public Works, by the Consortium of
Engineering Science, Inc., Sunn, Low, Tom & Hara, Inc., and
Dillingham Environmental Company, 1972.
Schwarz, Francis K., Probable Maximum Precipitation in the
Hawaiian Islands, Hydrometeorological Report No. 39, U.S.
Department of Commerce and U.S. Department of Army, Washington.
"Taliaferro, W., Jr., Rainfall of the Hawaiian Islands, Hawaii
Water Authority, September, 1959.
Miller, J. F., Two-to-Ten-Day Rainfall for Return Periods of 2 to
100 Years in the Hawaiian Islands, Technical Paper 51, U.S.
Department of Commerce, Washington.
279
-------
38- 1969 Factory ReEort, Factory Report 61, Sugar Technology
Department, Hawaiian Sugar Planters' Association, April,«1970.
39.
40.
41.
42.
21°. Factory Regort, Factory Report 71, Sugar Technology
Department, Hawaiian Sugar Planters' Association, June, 1971.
1922 Factory Report, Factory Report 83, Sugar Technology
Department, Hawaiian Sugar Planters' Association, April, 1973.
1973 Factory Rgfigrt, Factory Report 87, Sugar Technology
Department, Hawaiian Sugar Planters' Association, April, 1974.
Candelario, Dr. Rafael Munoz, et al.. Treatment of Liguid Wastes
from the Cane Sugar Industry in Puerto Rico,"water Resources
Research Institute, University of Puerto Rico,~Mayaguez, p.R.
If3- Development Document for Effluent Limitations Guidelines and New
§2HESe Performance Standards for the CANE SUGAR REFINING~iegment
Qt. the Sugar Processing Point Source Category. Effluent
Guidelines Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA-
440/1-74-002-c, March, 1974.
44. Federal Register, Volume 39, Number 55, page 10522, March 20,
280
-------
GLOSSARY
li "Act" - The Federal Water Pollution Act as amended.
2. Activated Sludge Process - A biological waste water treatment
process in which a mixture of waste water and activated sludge is
agitated and aerated. The sludge is subsequently separated from
the treated waste water (mixed liquor) by sedimentation and wasted
or returned to the process as needed.
3. Aerated Lagoon - A natural or artificial waste water treatment
pond in which mechanical or diffused air aeration is used to
supplement the oxygen supply.
4. Aerobic - This refers to life or processes that can occur only
in the presence of oxygen.
5. Alkalinity - Alkalinity is a measure of the capacity of water to
neutralize an acid.
6. Alphanaphthol Test - A test for sucrose concentration in condensate
and condenser water. The method is based on a color change which
occurs in the reaction of alphanaphthol with sucrose.
7. Anaerobic - This refers to life or processes that occur in the
absence of oxygen.
8. Ash Content - In analysis of sugar products, sulfuric acid is added
to the sample, and this residue, as "sulfated ash" heated to 800°C
is taken to be a measure of the inorganic constituents.
9. Bagaclilo - Fine bagasse particles. *
10. Bagasse - Solid material remaining after the milling process has re-
moved the juice from sugar cane. It is generally used as boiler fuel
and, in some cases, in the manufacture of various by-products.
11. Barometric Condenser - See Condenser, Barometric.
12. Barometric Leg - A long vertical pipe through which spent condenser
water leaves the barometric condenser. Serves as a source of vacuum.
13. Barometric Leg Water - Condenser cooling water.
14. Biological Waste Water Treatment - Forms of waste water treatment in
which bacterial or biochemical action is intensified to stabilize,
oxidize, and nitrify the unstable organic matter present. Intermit-
tent sand filters, contact beds, trickling filters, and activated
sludge processes are examples.
281
-------
16.
17.
Blackstrap Molasses - Molasses produced by the final vacuum pan,
and from which sugar is unrecoverable by ordinary means . Black-
strap is usually sold for various uses.
BOD - Biochemical Oxygen Demand is a semiquahtitative measure of
biological decomposition of organic matter in a water sample. It
is determined by measuring the oxygen required by micro-organisms
to oxidize the contaminants of a water sample under standard lab-
oratory conditions. The standard conditions include incubation for
five days at 20° C.
Boiler Ash - The solid residue remaining from combustion of fuel in
a boiler furnace.
18* Boiler Feedwater - Water used to generate steam in a boiler. This
water is usually condensate, except during boiler startup, when
treated fresh water is normally used.
19 • Boiler Slowdown - Discharge from a boiler system designed to prevent
a buildup of dissolved solids.
20. Calandria - The steam belt or heating element in an evaporator or
vacuum pan, consisting of vertical tube sheets constituting the
heating surface.
21 • Calandria Evaporator - An evaporator using a calandria; the standard
evaporator in current use in the sugar industry.
22 • Calandria Vacuum Pan - A vacuum pan using a calandria; the standard
vacuum pan in current use in the sugar industry.
23. Cane - Gross Cane: Crop material by weight as harvested, including
field trash and other extraneous material.
Net Cane: Gross cane less the weight of extraneous material.
24. Cane Milling - The process whereby raw sugarcane is chopped and
crushed, in order to separate the sugar-containing juice from the
solid pulp.
25 • Cane Washing - Washing of sugarcane with water to remove soil,
mud, rocks, and other foreign matter preparatory to milling.
26. Centrifugation - A procedure used to separate materials of differing
densities by subjecting them to high speed revolutions. In sugar
processing, centrifugation is used to remove sugar crystals from massecuite.
27 • Clarification - Removing undissolved materials (largely insoluble lime salts)
from cane juice by settling, filtration, or flotation.
282
-------
28. Clarifier - A unit of which the primary purpose is to reduce the
amount of suspended matter in a liquid.
29. Coagulation - The clumping of particles in order to settle out impurities;
often induced by chemicals such as lime or alum.
30. COD - Chemical Oxygen Demand. Its determination provides a measure
of the oxygen demand equivalent to that portion of matter in a sample
which is susceptible to oxidation by a strong chemical oxidant.
31. Compound Imbibition - The most common type of imbibition which involves
• the addition and recirculation of water and juices to the bagasse at
different points in a four mill network, in order to dissolve sucrose.
32. Condensate - Water resulting from the condensation of vapor.
33. Condenser - A heat exchange device used for condensation.
Barometric: Condenser in which the cooling water and the vapors
are in physical contact; the condensate is mixed
in the cooling water.
Surface: Condenser in which heat is transfered through a
barrier that separates the cooling water and the
vapor. The condensate can be recovered separately.
34. Condenser Water - Water used for cooling in a condenser.
35. Crystallization - The process through which sugar crystals separate
from massecuite.
36. Cush-cush - The coarser particles of impurities present in cane juice
after milling.
37. Decanting - Separation of liquid from solids by drawing off the upper
layer after the heavier material has settled.
38. Demineralization - Removal of mineral impurities from sugar.
39. Dextrose - Glucose. A monosaccharide sugar with the formula C6H1206.
Dextrose is a minor component of raw sugar.
40. Diatomaceous Earth - A viable earthy deposit composed of nearly pure
silica and consisting essentially of the shells of the microscopic
plants called diatoms. Diatomaceous earth is utilized by the cane
sugar industry as a filter aid.
41. Pisaccharides - A sugar such as sucrose composed of two
monosaccharides.
283
-------
42. P.O. - Dissolved Oxygen is a measure of the amount of free oxygen in a
water sample. It is dependent on the physical, chemical, and biochemical
activities of the water sample.
43. Drycleaning - Cleaning of raw cane without the use of water.
44. "Effect" - In systems where evaporators are operated in a series of several
units, each evaporator is known as an effect.
45. Entrainment - The entrapment of liquid droplets containing sugar in the
water vapor produced by evaporation of syrup.
46. Evaporator - A closed vessel heated by steam and placed under a vacuum.
The basic principle is that syrup enters the evaporator at .a temperature
higher than its boiling point under the reduced pressure, or is heated
to that temperature. The result is flash evaporation of a portion of the
water in the syrup.
47. Extraction - Pol extracted from cane per 100 pol in cane.
48. False Crystals - New sugar crystals which form spontaneously without
the presence of others. This event is undesirable and, therefore, vacuum
pan conditions are maintained in a narrow range of sucrose concentration
and temperature which precludes their formation.
49. Fiber - The dry water-insoluble fibrous material in cane products.
50. Filter Cake - The residue remaining after filtration of the sludge
produced by the clarification process.
51. Filter Mud - A mud produced by slurrying filter cake. The resultant
waste stream is the most significant source of solids and organics within
a cane sugar factory.
52. Filter Press - In the past, the most common type of filter used to
separate solids from sludge. It consists of a simple and efficient
plate and frame filter which allows filtered juice to mix with clarified
• juice and be sent to the evaporators.
53. Fixed Beds - A filter or adsorption bed where the entire media is
exhausted before any of the media is cleaned.
54. Flocculant - A substance that induces or promotes fine particles in a
colloidal suspension to aggregate into small lumps, which are more
easily removed.
55. Floorwash - Water used to wash factory floors and equipment.
56. Flotation - The raising of suspended matter to the surface of the
liquid in a tank as scum (by aeration, the evolution of gas, chemicals,
284
-------
electrolysis, heat, or bacterial decomposition) and the subsequent
removal of the scum by skimming. :
57. Fly Ash - Solid residue produced by combustion in a furnace.
58. Frothing Clarifiers - Flotation devices that separate' tricalcium
phosphate precipitate from the liquor.
59. Furfural - An aldehyde C4H30CHO used in making Furaw and as a resin.
60. Glucose - Dextrose.
61. GPP - Gallons per day.
62. GPM - Gallons per minute.
53. Granulation - The process which removes remaining moisture from sugar,
and thus also separates the crystals from one another.
64. Granulator - A rotary dryer used in sugar refineries to^remove free
moisture from sugar crystals prior to packaging or storing.
65. Gross Cane - A measure by weight of the entire harvested cane plant,
before processing.
66. Hvdrolization - The addition of H20 to a molecule. In sugar production
hydrolization of sucrose results in an inversion into glucose and fructose
and represents lost production.
67. Imbibition - The use of water in the milling process to dissolve sucrose.
Identical, in this connotation, to maceration and saturation.
68. Impoundment - A pond, lake, tank, basin, or other space which is used
for storage of waste water.
69. Impurities - Fine particles of bagasse, fats, waxes, and gums contained
in the cane juice after milling. These impurities are reduced by
successive refining processes.
70. Invert Sugars - Glucose and fructose formed by the splitting of
sucrose by the enzyme sucrase.
71. Ion-Exchange Resins - Resins consisting of' three-dimensional hydro-
carbon networks to which are attached ionizable groups.
72. Isomers - Two or more compounds containing the same elements and having
the same molecular weights, but differing in structure and properties,
e.g., glucose and fructose.
285
-------
73.
74.
75.
76.
77.
78.
79.
80.
81.
82.
83.
84.
85.
86.
87.
88.
89.
Lagoon - A pond containing raw or partially treated waste water in which
aerobic or anaerobic stabilization occurs.
Land Spreading - The disposal of waste water on land to achieve
degradation by soil bacteria.
Levulose - Fructose. A monosaccharide sugar composed of six carbon
chains with the formula C6H1206. Levulose is'a component of raw sugar.
Maceration - The use of water in the milling process to dissolve sucrose.
Identical, in this connotation, with imbibition and saturation.
Maceration Water - Water applied to the bagasse during the milling
process to dissolve sucrose, which is later reclaimed.
Massecuite - Mixture of sugar crystals and syrup which originates in
the boiling of the sugar (literally, cooked mass).
Malt Liquor - Molten sugar to which has been added a small amount of
water (half the weight of the sugar).
MGD - Million gallons per day.
gg/1 ~ Milligrams per liter (equals parts per million (ppm) when the
specific gravity is unity).
Mixed Media Filtration - A combination of different materials through
which a waste water or other liquid is passed for the purpose of
purification, treatment, or conditioning.
ml/1 - Milliliters per liter.
Moisture - Loss in weight due to drying under specified conditions,
expressed as percentage of total weight.
Molasses - A dark-colored syrup containing sucrose, dextrose, levulose,
amino acids, organic acids, and minerals produced in processing
cane and beet sugar.
Monosaccharides - A carbohydrate that does not hydrolyze, as glucose,
fructose, ribose, or other simple sugars: occurring naturally or
obtained by the hydrolysis of glycosides or polysaccharides.
- The sludge resulting from the clarification process.
Multiple Effect Evaporation - The operation of evaporators in a series.
Non-contact Waste Waters - Those waste waters such as spent cooling water
which are independent of the manufacturing process and contain no
pollutants attributable to the process.
286
-------
90. Nutrients - The nutrients in contaminated water are routinely analyzed
to characterize the food available for micro-organisms to promote
organic decomposition. They are:
Ammonia Nitrogen (NH3), mg/1 as N.
Kjeldahl Nitrogen (ON), mg/1 as N.
Nitrate Nitrogen (N03), mg/1 as N.
Total Phosphate (TP), mg/1 as P.
Ortho Phosphate (OP), mg/1 as P.
91. £H - pH is equal to the negative log of the hydrogen ion concentration,
92.
93.
94.
95.
96.
98.
99.
Phase of Supersaturation - Metastable phase in which existing sugar
crystals grow but new crystals do not form; the intermediate phase in
which existing crystals grow and new crystals do form; and the labile
phase in which new crystals form spontaneously without the presence of
others.
Plate and Frame Filter - A filtering device consisting of a
fastened inside a metal frame.
screen
POL - The value determined by single polarization of the normal weight of
a sugar product made up to a total volume of 100 milliliters at 20°C,
clarified when necessary with dry lead subacetate, and read in a tube
200 milliliters long at 20CC, using the Bates-Jackson saccharimeter scale.
The term is used in calculations as if it were a real substance.
Polluted Waste Waters - Those waste waters containing measurable quan-
tities of substances that are judged to be detrimental to receiving
waters and that are attributable to the process.
Polyelectrolytes - A coagulant aid consisting of long chained *
organic molecules.
97. Precoat Filter - A type of filter in which the media is applied
to an existing surface prior to filtration.
Raw Sugar - An intermediate product consisting of crystals of high
purity covered with a film of low quality syrup.
Recrystallizatidn - Formation of new crystals from previously melted
sugar liquor. Recrystallization is encouraged by evaporators and
accomplished in vacuum pans.
100. Remelt - A solution of low grade sugar in clarified juice or water.
101. Resorcinol Test - A color indicator test used for the determination of the
concentration of sucrose in condensate and condenser waters.
102. Ridge and Furrow Irrigation - A method of irrigation by which water
is allowed to flow along the surface of fields.
287
-------
•103.
104.
105.
106.
107.
108.
109.
110.
111.
112.
113.
Rotary Vacuum Filter - A rotating drum filter which utilizes suction to
separate solids from the sludge produced by clarification.
Saturation - The use of water in the milling process to dissolve
sucrose. Identical, in this connotation, with imbibition and maceration.
Seed Sugar - Small sucrose crystals which provide a surface for
continued crystal growth.
Setting Pond - See Clarifier.
Settlings - The material which collects in the bottom portion of a
clarifier.
Sludge - The separated precipitate from the clarification process. It
consists largely of insoluble lime salts and includes calcium phosphates,
coagulate albumin, fats, acids, gums, iron, alumina, and other
material.
Solids ~ Various types of solids are commonly determined on water samples.
These types of solids are:
Total Solids - (TS): The material left after evaporation
and drying of a sample at 103° to 105°C.
Dissolved Solids - (DS): The difference between the total
solids and the suspended solids.
Volatile Solids - (VS): Material which is lost when
the total solids sample is
heated to 550°C.
- Seattleable Solids (STS): The materials which settle in
an Immhoff cone in one hour.
Suspended Solids (SS): The material removed from a
sample filtered through a
standard glass fiber filter
and dried at 103-105°C.
Spray Evaporation - A method of waste water disposal in
which water is sprayed into the air to expedite evaporation.
Spray Irrigation - A method of irrigation by which water is sprayed
from nozzles onto a crop. In order to avoid clogging of the nozzles,
the water must be relatively low in suspended solids.
Strike - The massecuite content of a vacuum pan.
Sucrose - A disaccharide having the formula C12H22011. The terms
288
-------
114.
sucrose and sugar are generally interchangeable, and the common sugar
of commerce is sucrose in varying:degrees of purity. Refined cane
sugar is essentially 100 percent sucrose.
Sugar - The sucrose crystals, including adhering mother liquor,
remaining after centrifugation.
Commercial: Sugar from high grade massecuite, v/hich enters
into commerce.
Low Grade: Sugar from low grade massecuite, synonymous
with remelt sugar.
96 DA: A value used for reporting commercial sugar on
a common basis, calculated from an empirical
formula issued by the United States Department
of Agriculture.
115. Supersaturation - The condition of a solution when it contains more
solute, (sucrose) than that which would be dissolved under
normal pressure and temperature.
116. Surface Condenser - See Condenser, Surface.
117. Suspended Solids - Solids found in waste water or in the, stream
. which in most cases can be removed by filtration. The origin of
suspended matter may be man-made wastes or natural sources as from
erosion.
118. Turbidity - A condition in a liquid caused by the presence of fine
suspended matter and resulting in the scattering and absortion of
light; an analytical quantity usually reported in arbitrary turbidity
units determined by measurements of light diffraction.
119. Vapor - Steam liberated from boiling sugar liquor.
120. Vapor Belt - The distance between the liquid level in an evaporator
or vacuum pan and the top of the cylindrical portion of the body.
121. Waste Streams - Any liquified waste material produced by a factory.
289
-------
-------
,— ^
CO
E-I
l-l
p^
O
H
E-I
*?
V^X
Jg
M
H
. pq
0
o
E-i
W
,-1
EH rH CO As
•H CO 3 3 CO CO O 5-1
5-1 CO C C! 5-1 'O >> COCOO
O -H vH -H CO cd cd ,Q 4-1 O
tHng0 4JM T3 cdcoo
Cd O — "--. CO 60 13 "~~- "•— ' CO g i— 1
COO^HCOWCOgTl fi CO 5-1 1-J ^
M' cd5-iM5-i'H4J O COCO S-l COC04J
co i ocococo -u fi OCOMCO co a) j-> C C
4-1 4J4-14-1 (3CO C04-1C05-IC04-1M 5-lCOCOO
COO) 0 0. CO CO Q) COO C04-14JC00COQ) C00O4-1
co0 cd cd000 o "^-* oj co r£d cd 0 4^ ft
5-1 5-1 5-1 CO COCOCOC0^0a,5-l CU P4CUCOO
cdO 60 60OOO5-iOCO}-i5-i5-iO-HC060Og 105-15-1^5-1
4J •!-( Q Q if-] •!-{ •{-{ Q) *H 5-1 CO CO CO T~H 4-1 O O 'H O O cd cd 5-1 CO
O rQ rH i— 1 rO rO rQ 4-1 . *"* 60 4J 4-1 4-1 r— 1 0 0 i-H ^ i— 1 0334-14-1
CO 3 -H -H 3 3 3 -H 3 0) CO -H -H -H CO 4J -H 3 -H 4-1 a4 CT1 CO Q) .
rd O A! AI O O O rH O 13 0 t-H < — 1 A) O cd A! O Ai Cd CO CO 0 0
60
L^j jj f!j ^"i
"~- -H -H cd
. cd'cd--«.---0 o • — g
0000000 CO -S rtSO
CO 0 0 60
Cd3 60 60333 3O •"•^ J504J6030 4-iCT'cr'Ai
,CO A! AlOOOrHOo 0rHrHAiOcdA!cJA! cdCOCOAJg
* -K
CNj" C7
CO Hr
1 CN
Pt* CO rH r** <3" 60 CTv *4*
tO CM LO CO CO o *sf" IO CO lO CO *sl" CT\ *H CM CM r^> ^CJ*
O IO ITlCM CMCMCT**— 'OOOvO-vt-^COin O COCTvinOrH
•o-it vo p\iOcy>
OCO O OOrHOOOvOiOOcOOOCMOOmrH lOOvDOO
CO CM rH • CO O
CM O I~~ CO
1— | ^ n \O
' CO O M
O ^ -ri
SwX> r-H
eu
•H
4J
4-1 rH 4J 4-1 {Tj 60 4J {3 3
M-l --^M-IHHv-) ffi 604-t-H 0
C3C30CO rHg T3-H (3
00 H HHHl»H333ta4JCdp. a
a) O
CO Td 4-1 >> TS -H
4-1 (3 -H 5-1 — CO
r-Hi-HSO CO 3CO 5-1
cdcdflO ^3 O d x-s CO
gg-HCO Cj CO S-l O COCO >
M !-J T3 g W COCO 4-J COrHC060CO fi
4-lCO COG~-~ C05-I 3 g rH 5-l34Jj3x-«. O
CO.C rd34J4J4J4Jrc!^! PI5J cd cdcdQ)04J 0
COH HOCUCOOJOJOcd -Hd) >W 60 3^60COC5^
^r* c{ ^**^ 14_] 14^ lm 14_| «(H **-^ O Cj CO ^ cd
IC04-1C04J co ci a ft w co w o ~-~- ^a cu a) co 3
•H-H-H-HOOOOOCO OOCOCOCOTJ-H 1305-15-1^ 4J
Q)C04-IC!4-lC!-H'rlTl'r('H5-l4JrHrHCOj3j3flrHCOgGcded TJ O
OO5-I 5-1 33333COCOcdcdOC!c!O'rj-HO O'CT'Ocd
cdcdpq pq OOOOOT3M-l&0&0Ic!T-lTHaJ00a4 WW4-l!>» -K
291
-------
-------