&EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Industrial Environmental Research EPA-600/2-78-119
Laboratory May 1978
Cincinnati OH 45268
Research and Development
Evaporative Process
for Treatment of
Phosphate
Containing Effluent
-------
RESEARCH REPORTING SERIES
Research reports of the Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, have been grouped into nine series. These nine broad cate-
gories were established to facilitate further development and application of en-
vironmental technology. Elimination of traditional grouping was consciously
planned to foster technology transfer and a maximum interface in related fields.
The nine series are:
1. Environmental Health Effects Research
2. Environmental Protection Technology
3. Ecological Research
4. Environmental Monitoring
5. Socioeconomic Environmental Studies
6. Scientific and Technical Assessment Reports (STAR)
7. Interagency Energy-Environment Research and Development
8. "Special" Reports
9. Miscellaneous Reports
This report has been assigned to the ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION TECH-
NOLOGY series. This series describes research performed to develop and dem-
onstrate instrumentation, equipment, and methodology to repair or prevent en-
vironmental degradation from point and non-point sources of pollution. This work
provides the new or improved technology required for the control and treatment
of pollution sources to meet environmental quality standards.
This document is available to the public through the National Technical Informa-
tion Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161.
-------
EPA-600/2-78-119
June 1978
EVAPORATIVE PROCESS FOR TREATMENT
OF PHOSPHATE CONTAINING EFFLUENT
by
D. G. Reininga
Alcoa Laboratories
Alcoa Center, Pa. 15069
Grant No. S-803261
Project Officer
Mary K. Stinson
Industrial Pollution Control Division
Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory
Edison, New Jersey 08817
INDUSTRIAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
U, S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CINCINNATI, OHIO 45268
-------
DISCLAIMER
This report has been reviewed by the Industrial
Environmental Research Laboratory, U. S. Environmental
Protection Agency, and approved for publication. Approval
does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect the
views and policies of the U. S. Environmental Protection
Agency, nor does mention of the trade names or commercial
products constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
-------
FOREWORD
When energy and material resources are extracted, pro-
cessed, converted, and used, the related pollutional impacts
on our environment and even on our health often require
that new and increasingly more efficient pollution control
methods be used. The Industrial Environmental Research
Laboratory - Cincinnati (IERL-CI) assists in developing and
demonstrating new and improved methodologies that will meet
these needs both efficiently and economically.
These studies were undertaken to demonstrate the perform-
ance and reliability of a new, evaporative process for
treatment of dilute, phosphate-containing effluent. A large,
pilot-scale installation was built at Alcoa's Warrick County,
Indiana plant and tested on actual, phosphate-containing
effluent from aluminum coil cleaning operation. This process
offers a substantial saving in money and energy by recovering
water and chemicals from the wastewater effluent while
operating from waste stack gas heat. This system can be used
for handling low-concentration wastewater effluents from many
industrial processes where high purity water and/or chemical
recovery for recycling is desired, or simply for reducing the
total volume of effluent to facilitate waste disposal.
Such information will be of value both to EPA's
regulatory program (Effluent Guidelines Division) and to
industry itself in arriving at meaningful and achievable
discharge levels. Within EPA's R&D program the information
will be used as part of the continuing program to develop and
evaluate improved and cost effective technology to minimize
industrial waste discharges.
For further information concerning this subject the
Industrial Pollution Control Division should be contacted.
David G. Stephan
Director
Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory
Cincinnati
iii
-------
ABSTRACT
A unique evaporation/humidification process for treating
wastewater effluent has been developed at Alcoa Laboratories.
A major portion of the effluent is recovered as water of high
purity, suitable for recycle or reuse; the small volume of
concentrated chemicals can be either recycled or disposed of
easily. The process operates at low temperatures and near-
atmospheric pressures. Low pressure steam generated from
waste heat is sufficient for its operation.
A 75,700 L/day (20,000 gal/day) pilot plant was installed
at Alcoa's Warrick County, Indiana Plant to demonstrate the
performance and reliability of the process for treatment of a
dilute, phosphate-containing effluent. The installation was
placed in service in January, 1975 and operated on a non-
continuous basis until October, 1975. During this time
various problems were solved and optimum operating conditions
were established.
The average effluent treatment rate was 71,200 L/day
(18,800 gal/day) and excellent quality water was obtained.
The system operated satisfactorily when effluent and steam
were available. Tests at Alcoa Laboratories showed that the
product condensate can be used as rinse water at the phosphate
cleaning lines in place of deionized water, and the
concentrated phosphate blowdown can be recycled as make-up
to the phosphate cleaning solution.
This report was submitted in fulfillment of EPA Grant
S-803261-01-4 by Alcoa Laboratories under the partial sponsor-
ship of the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. This
report covers the period January 3, 1975 to October 3, 1975
and work was completed as of January 27, 1976
IV
-------
CONTENTS
Foreword i i i
Abstract iv
Figures vi
Tables vi
1. Introduction 1
2. Conclusions 8
3. Recommendations 9
4. Operational Study 11
5. Water and Phosphate Recycling 16
6. Economic Evaluation 18
Bibliography 27
Appendix 28
-------
FIGURES
Number Page
1 A Schematic of the Evaporation Column 3
2 Photograph of the Pilot Plant Evaporative
Process Installation and the Waste Heat
Steam Generator at Warrick 4
3 Flow Diagram of the Evaporative Pilot
Installation 5
TABLES
1 Operating Data for the Warrick 75,000 L/d
(20,000 gpd) Evaporative Process 10
2 Waste Heat Steam Generator 12
3 Summary of Stream Analyses - First Series
of Tests (January 3 to May 7, 1975) 20
4 Summary of Stream Analyses - Second Series
of Tests (June 2 to July 10, 1975) 21
5 Summary of Stream Analyses - Third Series
of Tests (September 3 to October 3, 1975) 22
6 Analyses of Condensate Samples 23
7 Analyses of Phosphate Cleaning Solution 24
8 Analyses of Phosphate Concentrate 25
9 Cost Evaluation for a 1,100,000 L/d
(300,000 gpd) Evaporative Process Plant 26
VI
-------
SECTION 1
INTRODUCTION
Waste treatment technology is constantly evolving in
response to changing requirements of society. As society
raises water quality standards and new production levels
create additional and different wastes, new technology must
be introduced to treat, alter or reuse these wastes.
Industry produces many dilute aqueous wastes that are
both difficult and costly to treat in order to meet the
effluent quality standards required by current environmental
guidelines. The ultimate goal is "zero discharge" by 1985.
In addition, the guidelines are often being changed as effects
of wastes upon the environment are documented.
In 1970 the Aluminum Company of America embarked upon a
program to apply previous experience and patents* in desalina-
tion technology to waste treatment. The development program
had the following objectives:
(1) Produce water of such quality that all future water
quality standards would be met, or to achieve a quality that
would permit reuse in the operation.
(2) Produce a concentrated waste that could be reused, sold
as a useful product- incinerated or dried for easier disposal.
(3) Achieve net operating costs equal to or less than costs
of available conventional treatment.
From this effort a patented** thermal method has been developed
for treating various waste waters to produce high quality
water and concentrate waste for recovery or disposal. This
method has been tested on diverse wastewaters with favorable
results.
The Alcoa plant at Warrick County, Indiana, produces low-
concentration phosphate wastewater effluent from the rinsing
area of the coil preparation line for rigid container sheet.
The effluent is discharged at a pH of about 10 and at
approximately 55°C (130°F). It contains between 1,000 to
5,000 mg/L of dissolved phosphate and smaller quantities of
* U.S. Patent No. 3,528,890 and 3,575,817
** U.S. Patent No. 3,822,192 and 3,843,463
-------
aluminum hydroxide, sodium aluminates and other complexes
of these elements. Approximately 200 mg/L of low viscosity
mineral oil is also in the effluent. The effluent can be
treated by either a standard chemical waste treatment process
or by a new evaporative process (Thermopure*). The advantage
of the latter process is that high quality water and
phosphate can be recovered and recycled to the coil
preparation lines for reuse. Also, the heat to operate the
evaporative process can be obtained from steam generated from
hot stack gases. Therefore, this approach would not only
solve the effluent disposal problem but would also save a
substantial sum of money by conserving- materials and energy.
The main purpose for the installation of the evaporative
process at Warrick was to demonstrate the performance and
reliability of the process treating the phosphate wastewater
effluent directly from the coil preparation line. The pilot
plant was designed to demonstrate that water of sufficient
purity for recycling as rinse water could be produced and that
the effluent could be concentrated to a low volume to facilitate
waste disposal. Two methods of waste disposal were considered
at that time. One was landfill and the other was to utilize
the phosphate content as fertilizer. Another alternative was
to recycle the phosphate to the coil preparation lines. It
was recognized that additional treatment, such as oil removal
from the condensate or chemical treatments or drying of the
phosphate concentrate, might be required; but it was felt that
these processes would not have to be demonstrated since their
technology was not new as was the case with the evaporative
process.
The Warrick evaporative treatment installation was
designed to treat 75,700 L/day (20,000 gal/day) of effluent.
The all-aluminum column is 63.5 cm (25 inches) in diameter
(I.D.), contains four hundred and fifty-six 1.6 cm (5/8 inch)
diameter (I.D.) aluminum tubes and is 7.6 meters (25 feet)
high. A schematic of the column is shown in Figure 1 and a
photograph of the installation in Figure 2.
The operation of the process is shown schematically in
Figure 3. Wastewater from the coil preparation lines flows
through strainers to a pH adjustment tank where a pH meter
monitors the solution and operates a metering pump to add
sulfuric acid to neutralize the solution. This neutralized
solution is pumped into the recirculating tank and then into
the top of the evaporative column where it is dispersed in
a large volume of air from a blower. The wastewater/air
* Trade name of the Alcoa evaporative wastewater treatment
process hereafter referred to as the "process" or
"evaporative process".
-------
ALCOA THERMOPURE
PROCESS
WASTEWATER
CONDENSER
AIR
CT'TSI
F
HIGH PURITY
WATER
STEAM
CONDENSATE —
CONCENTRATED
BRINE
AIR
AIR/WATER
VAPOR
Figure 1. A schematic of the evaporative column,
3
-------
SlBI
Figure 2. Photograph of the pilot plant evaporative process installation and the waste heat
steam generator at Warrick.
-------
Ln
STEAM
GENERATOR
H2S04
THERMOPURE
COLUMN
NEUTRAL-
IZATION
TANK
LIMESTONE
L
FEED
TANK
COND.
TANK
CONDENSATE
SETTLING
TANK
SLOWDOWN
Figure 3. Flow diagram of the evaporative pilot installation.
-------
mixture passes concurrently down the inside of the tubes,
which are heated at the lower portion with 0 - 34.5 kPa (0 -
5 lb/in*) gauge steam. As the temperature increases, the
air is humidified with water vapor from the wastewater. A
high velocity in the tubes maintains a good dispersion of water
in air to provide a large surface area to promote rapid
humidification. At the point of wastewater/air mixture
discharge from the tubes, the air has absorbed a large amount
of water vapor (approximately 10 to 15 per cent of the
wastewater feed to the column).
This air/vapor mixture is then conducted through a bypass
line, through a demister, to the exterior side of the tubes in
the upper portion of the column where much of the water vapor
condenses on the relatively cooler tube bundle, thereby
preheating the wastewater/air mixture and increasing the amount
of vapor produced inside the tubes. This routing of the air/
vapor mixture provides approximately 50 per cent of the
wastewater heating required. In the process, approximately
55 per cent of the product water is produced by the condensing
water vapor in the column. This water is designated "column
condensate". The remainder of the product water is produced
from the overheat vapor left in the column that is fed into an
air-cooled heat exchanger. The water which condenses in the
exchanger is designated "overhead condensate". Both the
column and overhead condensates flow into the product condensate
tank.
The unvaporized liquid waste at the bottom of the column
is discharged to the recirculating feed tank where it is mixed
with new wastewater solution. This solution is recirculated
to the top of the column for further processing until the
desired concentration is reached. A small amount of ground
limestone is added to the solution in the feed recirculating
tank to aid in precipitating the insoluble aluminum compounds
which would otherwise cause rapid scaling of the Thermopure
column. Approximately 4 per cent of the feed solution to the
column is tapped-off and routed to the settling tank. Here,
about 25 per cent of blowdown is removed from the bottom of
the settling tank as sludge (approximately 25,000 mg/L
phosphate and limestone), and the other 75 per cent is
recirculated to the feed tank. The settling tank has a
residence time of approximately four hours.
One unique feature of the process is that the streams
exit the column at almost as high a temperature, 90 to 93°C
(195 to 200°F), as the incoming steam, so that the latent heat
can be used a second time for low-temperature process or space
heating.
The process operates at atmospheric pressure so that the
equipment does not have to be designed to withstand pressure
-------
or vacuum. All-aluminum components were used in the Warrick
plant; however, other materials such as steel, stainless
steel, copper alloys or titanium can be used. The choice
of materials depends primarily on cost and corrosion resistance
to the solution being processed.
A low pressure steam generator connected by ducts to four
preheat furnace stacks provided steam from waste stack gas
heat to operate the unit. However, due to intermittent
operation of the preheat furnaces and fuel reduction to them
to conserve energy during the test period, some of the tests
were conducted using a portable oil-fired steam generator.
Construction of the plant was started during the summer
of 1974 and was completed by December, 1974. A pipeline
was installed to carry the effluent from the coil preparation
lines to the evaporative treatment plant. The plant was
checked out during December, 1974 and operation was started
January 3, 1975.
-------
SECTION 2
CONCLUSIONS
1. The Thermopure evaporative treatment installation at
Warrick demonstrated that it has performance capability and
reliability for commercial operation. The plant operated and
produced water of excellent quality when effluent feed and
steam were available.
2. This installation demonstrated a substantial
savings in money and energy by recovering water and chemicals
from the wastewater effluent while operating from waste stack
gas heat. Projected figures indicate that a net operating
credit can be realized.
3. The recovered condensate water is of high purity
with an average conductivity around 6 microsiemens/cm. Over
80 per cent of the total effluent wastewater can be recycled
for use as rinse water at the coil preparation line.
4. The concentrated phosphate blowdown can be filtered
of suspended solids and recycled to the coil preparation line
for use as make-up in the phosphate cleaning solution. The
filtered solids, consisting mainly of phosphate and limestone,
can be used as a fertilizer additive.
5. This process represents a unique system for handling
low concentration wastewater effluents from any industrial
process where high purity water and/or chemical recovery for
recycling is desired, or simply for reducing the total
volume of effluent to facilitate waste disposal. The process
is particularly economically attractive where waste stack
gas heat is available.
-------
SECTION 3
RECOMMENDATIONS
The operation of the Warrick installation should be
continued with the necessary modifications. It could serve as
a treatment system for the phosphate wastewater effluent and
as a demonstration unit. It would be necessary to make several
changes in the present system to allow continuous operation
with minimum attendance and to recycle condensate water and
phosphate concentrate to the coil preparation lines.
The major changes in the Warrick installation would
include a steam generating system to provide a constant supply
of 1360 kg/hr (3,000 Ib/hr) steam. One source could be steam
generation from existing high temperature hot water (HTHW),
but serious consideration should be given to the use of waste
stack gas heat for generating the low pressure steam. For
example, the present waste heat generating system could be
equipped with an auxiliary burner to permit operation when
waste heat is not available. Other recommended improvements
in the system would include oil removal equipment to process
the wastewater effluent and/or product condensate water, a
larger storage tank for the wastewater to provide a more
constant supply, and an improved settling tank for removing
the phosphate concentrate blowdown. The estimated operating
costs and credits for the evaporative process incorporating
these changes are given in Table 1.
Although this small pilot plant shows a net operating
cost, Section 6 contains cost analyses which indicate that a
net operating credit can be realized for larger commercial
systems. For this reason, it is recommended that the present
installation be expanded to treat the total volume of effluent
waste at Warrick. This would include the extension of the
column array using the latest technology presently under
development at the Alcoa Laboratories. This advance design
column should have lower capital cost and considerably lower
steam requirements.
Plans will proceed with commercialization of the new
evaporative process. Many industries could benefit from this
system for treating low concentration wastewater effluent. Much
of the heat to run the process can be reused since the conden-
sate and blowdown temperatures are around 90.6°C (195°F). These
-------
streams could be used to heat other process waters or could be
used directly for space heating. The evaporative column can
be thought of as a heat exchanger which produces high quality
water and concentrates waste streams at the same time. Energy
conservation and pollution control are two important national
goals; the evaporative process offers the advantage of
accomplishing both.
TABLE 1 OPERATING DATA FOR THE WARRICK
75,700 L/d (20,000 GPD)
EVAPORATIVE PROCESS
Materials &
Labor
Heat Recovery
System
($/h)
Boiler
System
($/h)
Utilities
Steam
Electricity
Chemicals:
Limestone
Sulfuric Acid
Labor:
Operating,
Lab. , R&M
Operating Credits
Material Reuse:
High Purity
Water
Phosphate
1270 kg/h
(2,800 Ib/h)
15 kw
5.9 kg/h
(13 Ib/h)
3.7 kg/h
(8.2 Ib/h)
0.5 man
2430 L/h
(642 gal/h)
6.7 kg/h
(13.7 Ib/h)
Net Operating Cost
0.00
0.30
0.033
0.164
5.00
(1.61)
(1.78)*
$3.39/h
$2.11/h
$0.71/
1000 L
($2.69/
5.60
0.30
0.033
0.164
5.00
$5.50/h $11.10/h
(1.61)
(1.78)*
$3.39/h
$7.71/h
$2.60/
1000 L
($9.84/
1000 gal) 1000 gal)
* At 50% reuse - 3.4 kg/h (6.9 Ib/h)
10
-------
SECTION 4
OPERATIONAL STUDY
FIRST SERIES OF TESTS
The first series of tests were made from January to
May, 1975. Since the plant was exposed to the weather and was
operated only on weekdays, considerable difficulty was
experienced from freeze-ups over the weekend when the plant
was shut down. This caused delays to thaw out or repair
damaged pipes and meters. The only other cause for operational
delays resulted from the lack of effluent feed and steam to
the system. The effluent interruptions occurred when the coil
preparation lines were inoperative or not producing phosphate
waste. Steam interruptions occurred when the preheat furnaces,
from which the waste heat was taken, were shut down or not
operated at high heat.
Filter screens were present in the effluent inlet line
to remove foreign matter such as paper, rags, and other
miscellaneous debris. The low concentration phosphate effluent
feed had a pH of around 10. To protect the aluminum equipment
and to precipitate contaminating aluminum compounds, the
effluent was neutralized with sulfuric acid in a 7570 litre
(2,000 gallon) tank. Approximately 60 per cent acid by weight
of the phosphate content of the effluent was required. The
neutralization system and tank operated satisfactorily except
for a malfunction of the acid feed pump. Two thousand parts
per million ground limestone was added to the effluent at
the feed tank to help precipitate the insoluble compounds
and prevent rapid scaling of the process tubes. To maintain
the freshly added limestone in suspension and still achieve
settling of the precipitate from the effluent, a 3785 litre
(1,000 gallon) settling tank was installed. The feed make-up
could then be stirred properly in the feed recirculating tank
and the precipitate allowed to settle in the settling tank.
Without this separate tankage, the feed became very thick.
Because the preheat furnaces were operated intermittently,
the steam supply to the process was not constant. This made
it impossible to operate the column under constant conditions.
Also, the steam production was only 60 per cent of the original
design capacity of 1450 kilograms per hour (3200 pounds per
11
-------
hour) at a stack gas temperature of 316°C (600OF). The
maximum temperature, around 290°C (555°F), occurred during
tests in January, 1975. In February, 1975 the heat input to
the preheat furnaces was reduced to conserve fuel. This
dropped the maximum temperature for the remainder of the tests
to the 204 to 260°C (400 to 500°F) range.
As expected, the product condensate rate from the
process plant increased as the stack gas temperature increased.
Condensate production, therefore, was -limited by the amount of
steam produced. The maximum steam production from the stack
gas steam generator was only 907 kg/hr (2000 Ibs/hr). The
average condensate production rate ranged from approximately
45,400 L/day (12,000 gpd) for stack temperatures around
260 to 288°C (500 to 555°F) to 22,700 L/day (6000 gpd) for
temperatures around 177 to 204°C (350 to 400°F) . See Table 2.
The effluent feed was concentrated to a maximum of 34,000 mg/L
total dissolved solids. Analyses of the various streams are
given in Table 3.
_ TABLE 2. _ WASTE HEAT STEAM GENERATION* _
Stack Gas Temperature Average Condensate Rate
_ (L/d) _
260 to 291 (500 to 555°F) 45,042 (11,900 gpd)
232 to 260 (450 to 500°F) 31,037 (8,200 gpd)
204 to 232 (400 to 450°F) 26,874 (7,100 gpd)
177 to 204 (350 to 400°F) 21,575 (5,700 gpd)
* First series of tests (January 3 to May 7, 1975).
The level of total dissolved solids and phosphate was
satisfactory during the periods of normal operation.
Occasionally the feed had a tendency to foam, particularly
during start-up. During these periods the amount of
entrainment in the condensate increased. Most of the oil was
carried over as oil vapor so that oil contamination was
unavoidable. Various mechanical and adsorption systems can be
used to remove the small quantity of oil from the condensate
if required. Samples of the condensate and phosphate
concentrate for reuse were evaluated at the Alcoa Laboratories;
they will be discussed later.
12
-------
The most serious problem encountered in operation of the
column was plugging of some of the tubes. After about three
months' operation, the column was opened for inspection. About
25 per cent of the tubes in the center of the tube bundle were
totally or partially plugged by scale buildup, while the
remaining tubes in the outer 75 per cent of the tube bundle
were in good condition and showed only a very thin scale. A
slow formation of scale was expected, based on laboratory
tests, and this could be removed in about one hour by cold
5 per cent phosphoric acid. Provisions were made for
circulating this acid for cleaning purposes. It readily
removed the scale from the outer tubes, but the plugged inner
tubes had to be mechanically cleaned (drilled).'
SECOND SERIES OF TESTS
A second series of tests were scheduled for June 2 to
July 10, 1975 using a portable oil-fired boiler to provide a
constant supply of steam. The objectives of these tests were
to operate the plant under steady state conditions, investigate
the tube plugging problem and to supply condensate water and
phosphate concentrate for laboratory tests in a pilot coil
cleaning line to determine their suitability for reuse.
Prior to initiating this second test series, it was
thought that tube plugging occurred when the feed solution
had formed a thick mass before proper stirring and settling
was obtained. This theory was disproved when the previously
cleaned column was opened for inspection after only three days
into this new test period. About 10 per cent of the tubes in
the center of the bundle were again plugged while the
remaining tubes were clean. The aluminum column top was
replaced with a transparent plastic cover so that the top of
the tube bundle could be observed during operation. Once this
was done, the reason for the plugging of the center tubes
became evident. The feed water was sprayed onto the tube
sheet by a single nozzle, which gave a poor spray distribution
pattern. Most of the spray went to the outside tubes while
the center tubes received very little spray. The average feed
water rate per tube was 0.57 L/min (0.15 gpm) and the evapora-
tion rate was about 0.08 L/min (0.02 gpm) per tube. If the
flow rate through a tube were lower than the evaporation rate,
the feed solution would dry out on the inside surface of the
tube rapidly building up scale until the tube was plugged with
deposit.
Through this second series of tests the condensate rate
averaged 47,300 L/day (12,500 gal/day) ranging from 36,700 to
60,200 L/day (9700 to 15,100 gal/day). The volume of
effluent treated averaged 56,000 L/day (14,800 gal/day)
ranging from 45,800 to 71,200 L/day (12,100 to 18,800 gal/day)
and the average steam rate was 910 kg/hr (2000 Ib/hr) ranging
13
-------
from 730 to 1100 kg/hr (1600 to 2400 Ib/hr). Compositional
data given in Table 4 were satisfactory except for the high
level of dissolved solids in the column condensate. Examination
of the data obtained during the first series of tests showed
that excellent quality condensate had been obtained during this
period, but that the quality started to deteriorate during the
latter weeks of those tests and continued to deteriorate during
these tests in June. This behavior suggested that the
demister may have been partially plugged so that it could no
longer function properly. The demister was removed for
examination, and it was found that more than half of the free
space was plugged so that the vapor velocity through the
remaining space was too high and entrainment into the column
condensate results. The demister was cleaned by immersion
in cold 5 per cent phosphoric acid so that it would be clean
for the next series of tests. A multiple-nozzle spray system
was designed to improve the uniformity of the spray over the
tubes and installed for the next series of tests conducted
during the month of September. The results of the laboratory
tests to determine whether the condensate water and phosphate
concentrate could be reused will be discussed later.
THIRD SERIES OF TESTS
The objectives of this third series of tests conducted
from September 3 to October 3, 1975 were to determine the
effectiveness of the multiple spray nozzles in preventing
plugging of the center tubes, confirm the deterioration of the
column condensate quality if the demister should become
plugged, investigate two systems to reduce the oil content in
the product water condensate, and demonstrate the reliability
of the evaporative plant by continuous operation from Monday
to Friday for a one month period.
The results obtained with the multiple spray nozzles were
encouraging. Portholes were installed so that the spray
action could be seen. Observation of the spray pattern
confirmed that the desired uniformity had been achieved.
After the first week of operation, the column was opened for
inspection. No scale was evident from visual inspection; a
rod dropped through the tubes confirmed that they were open.
The column was operated for another week, and the inspection
again showed that the tubes were open; however, a thin layer of
scale was removed by cleaning with cold 5 per cent phosphoric
acid for one hour. The same pattern was observed during the
last two weeks of this test series.
The demister was left out of the system during the first
week of operation to get a measure of the demister effectiveness
As expected, the column condensate quality was poor with the
TDS (total dissolved solids) varying from 10 to 200 mg/L and
14
-------
averaging 85 mg/L. However, the overhead condensate quality
was good, varying from 0 to 22 mg/L. The clean demister was
then put back in the vapor bypass line and the column condensate
quality improved dramatically. The TDS of the column
condensate varied from 0 to 10 mg/L and averaged 4.2 mg/L, and
the overhead condensate varied from 0 to 10 mg/L and
averaged 4.4 mg/L. These results clearly demonstrated the
effectiveness of the demister and the necessity of keeping
it clean. It could be cleaned in place at the same time
the tube bundle is cleaned.
Although laboratory tests conducted with product water
condensate from the second series of tests had shown that a
small quantity of oil in the water is not detrimental when
used as rinse water, it was felt desirable to study some
methods of lowering the oil content. This might be necessary
if the condensate were to be used for other purposes. The
column and overhead condensate streams were combined in the
condensate tank. Two types of oil removal equipment were
tested. One was a mechanical oil separator, and the other
system was a 20.3 cm (8 inch) diameter carbon adsorption column
packed to a depth of 107 cm (3-1/2 feet) with 30 mesh activated
carbon. Condensate was passed through the mechanical oil
separator at a rate of 28.4 L/min (7.5 gpm) and through the
carbon column at 3.8 L/min (1.0 gpm). The average oil content
of inlet condensate was 19 mg/L. After passing through the
mechanical oil separator, the average oil content was 15
mg/L; and after the carbon column, the average oil content was
10 mg/L. By conducting further studies with the oil separators,
it is felt that these results can be improved. A summary
listing of the overall results of this third series of tests
is contained in Table 5.
The reliability of the evaporative process during this
series was demonstrated by the fact that the plant operated
satisfactorily as long as effluent and steam were supplied.
The system operated satisfactorily about 80 per cent of the
time between startup at the beginning of the week and shutdown
at the end of the week. The 20 per cent downtime was caused
either by failures of the portable boiler or by an insufficient
volume of effluent for processing.
15
-------
SECTION 5
WATER AND PHOSPHATE RECYCLING
Product water and phosphate concentrate were evaluated at
Alcoa Laboratories to determine whether they could be recycled
to the coil cleaning lines. The condensate would be used for
rinsing purposes and the phosphate would be used for make-up
to the chemical cleaning solution. The oil content and
conductivity of the condensate sample returned from the first
series of tests are listed in Table 6. They represented a
wide range of values and were evaluated to determine their
suitability for use as rinse water in place of the deionized
water presently used. The tests indicated that the process
condensate was satisfactory for use as rinse water. The slight
oil and dissolved solids did not affect the finishing quality
of aluminum.
A sample of the phosphate concentrate also taken during
the first test series (March 20, 1975) was tested to determine
if it could be used to make up fresh phosphate cleaning
solution. A portion of this sample was processed by ultra-
filtration using a polysulfone (PM10) membrane with 38A
pore size. Another portion was settled and decanted, and a
third portion was passed through an activated carbon column
after settling and decanting. The pH of the three solutions
was adjusted to between 10 and 11 with sodium hydroxide to
produce the desired etching activity on aluminum. The results
of the etching tests are given in Table 7- All three
solutions gave the desired etching activity required of the
cleaning solution.
As a final test, all three of the previously mentioned
phosphate solutions were combined and evaluated as a cleaning
solution on the Laboratories' pilot coil preparation line.
Evaluated were the evaporative process phosphate concentrate,
a 1:1 mixture of this solution and fresh phosphate cleaning
solution, and 100 per cent fresh solution as a control. The
results showed that the column phosphate concentrate and the
1:1 mixture was comparable to fresh solution and gave
acceptable cleaning at contact times usually encountered
in plant coil cleaning lines.
On June 10, 11, 12, and 13, during the second series of
tests, 1136 litres (300 gallons) of phosphate concentrate and
16
-------
1136 litres (300 gallons) of column and overhead condensate
were collected and sent to the laboratory for more extensive
tests at the pilot coil preparation line. Table 8 gives
the analysis of the phosphate concentrate. The results
showed that the phosphate concentrate would be reusable at the
cleaning stage of the coil preparation lines for processing
rigid container sheet. Approximately 50 to 60 per cent fresh
phosphate cleaning solution had to be added to the phosphate
concentrate to achieve satisfactory cleaning efficiency. The
condensate water was also shown to be reusable as rinse water
in the coil preparation lines.
17
-------
SECTION 6
ECONOMIC EVALUATION
When the data from the operations of the 75,700 L/d
(20,000 gpd) evaporative process at Warrick are translated to
a commercial size system, a very favorable economic situation
exists. In fact, a net operating credit can be realized.
Table 9 contains a cost evaluation for a system based on
the total dilute wastewater effluent at Warrick of 1,100,000
L/d (300,000 gpd). Capital operating costs are given for a
system operating from waste heat and employing an oil-fired
boiler. The cost bases for this analysis are:
1. Phosphate concentration in effluent
2. Reduced volume of effluent
3. Per cent phosphate recovered
4. Steam
5. Electricity
6. Deionized water
7. Ground limestone
8. Sulfuric acid
9. Phosphate
10. Phosphoric acid
11. Labor
12. Operates 24 hr/day, 365 days/hr
2100 mg/L
5.5X
50
$4.41/1000 kg
($2.00/1000 Ib)
$5.56/GJ
($0.02/KWH)
$0.66/1000 L
($2.50/1000 gal)
$5.51/metric ton
$5.00/ton
$0.04/kg ($0.02/
Ib)
$0.57/kg ($0.26/
Ib)
$0.04/kg (0.02/
Ib)
$10.00/man-h
18
-------
In terms of capital investment, the heat recovery
system added an additional $240,000 cost. However, the savings
in energy reduce the daily operating costs from $2,759 to $651.
Where credit is taken for the high purity water and phosphate
recovery, the net operating cost of the system employing a
boiler is $1.24/1000 L ($4.70/1000 gal). A credit of $0.62/
1000 L ($2.33/1000 gal) is realized by utilizing waste heat.
An advanced system design has been tested in the.
laboratory which reduces the energy consumption by approximately
40%. Since the steam cost is major in the system employing
a boiler, the net operating cost is reduced by more than 50 per
cent using the more efficient design. This makes the
evaporative system very attractive economically, even when
waste heat is not used.
19
-------
TABLE 3. SUMMARY OF STREAM ANALYSES* - FIRST SERIES OF TESTS (JANUARY 3 TO MAY 7, 1975)
ro
Stream
Waste Effluent
Feed Make- Up
Condensate
Normal Operation
Column
Overhead
Overall Operation
Col umn
Overhead
Process Slowdown
Steam
*Values were taken
TDS were determined
Range
Average
Range
Average
Range
Average
Range
Average
Range
Average
Range
Average
Range
Average
Range
Average
Flow
Rate
(L/d)
17 411 - 77 971
(4600 - 20 600 gpd)
35 579 (9400 gpd)
4542 - 29 145
(1200 - 7700 gpd)
14 762 (3900 gpd)
6052 - 22 710
(1600 - 6000 gpd)
12112 (3200 gpd)
757 - 22 332
(200 - 5900 gpd)
9084 (2400 gpd)
345 - 907 kg/hr
(760 - 2000 Ib/hr)
726 kg/hr (1600 Ib/hr)
from the laboratory stream analyses
from conductivity measurements and
PH
9.6 - 10.6
10.0
5.6 - 9.9
6.7
5.0 - 7.6
6.4
4.9 - 7.1
5.7
6.0 - 8.5
6.9
except for the TDS
calibration curves
Total
Dissolved
Solids @
500°C (mg/L)
1600 - 18 200
4800
0 - 57
12
0-16
5
0 - 348
48
0-62
8
3800 - 34 000
14 000
«•"«••-
(total dissolved
derived from lab<
Total
P as P04
(mg/Lf
480-10 900
2600
600-11 700
2900
0.5 - 5.5
2.5
0.4 - 4.2
2.0
0.6 - 62
11.7
0.4 - 11.7
2.7
___«
solids) and flow
jratory results.
Oil
(mg/L)
27 - 800
220
40 - 370
170
0-20
9
9-81
44
190 - 1670
610
— ""* "*""
rate data.
Extreme
values were generally ignored.
-------
TABLE 4. SUMMARY OF STREAM ANALYSES* - SECOND SERIES OF TESTS (JUNE 2 TO JULY 10, 1975)
ro
Stream
Waste Effluent
Feed Make-Up
Condensate
Col umn
Overhead
Process Slowdown
Range
Average
Range
Average
Range
Average
Range
Average
Range
Average
Flow
Rate
(L/d) PH
45 799 - 71 158 9.1 - 10.3
(12 100 - 18 800 gpd)
56 018 (14 800 gpd) 10.0
6.1 - 7.2
6.6
27 252 - 36 336 5.8 - 8.2
(7200 - 9600 gpd)
31 794 (8400 gpd) 7.1
9463 - 20 818 4.9 - 6.5
(2500 - 5500 gpd)
15 519 (4100 gpd) 5.4
1779 - 28 009 5.3 - 8.6
(470 - 7400 gpd)
8706 (2300 gpd) 7.2
Total
Dissolved
Solids @
500°C(mg/L)
1000 - 11 800
4700
20 - 320
140
0 - 18
9.5
3500 - 44 000
27 500
Total
P as P04
(mg/L)
480 - 8100
2100
480 - 7500
2700
19 - 60
33
0.0 - 3.1
1.1
5800 - 40 000
17 300
Oil
(mg/L)
96 - 320
190
56 - 220
120
3-15
9
11-87
36
250 - 1300
670
Steam
Range
Average
726 - 1089 kg/hr
(1600 - 2400 Ib/hr)
907 kg/hr (2000 Ib/hr)
*Values were taken from the laboratory stream analyses except for the TDS (total dissolved solids) and flow rate data.
TDS were determined from conductivity measurements and calibration curves derived from laboratory results. Extreme
values were generally ignored.
-------
TABLE 5. SUMMARY OF STREAM ANALYSES* - THIRD SERIES OF TESTS (SEPTEMBER 3 TO OCTOBER 3, 1975)
ro
Stream
Waste Effluent
Feed Make- Up
Condensate
Without Demister
Col umn
Overhead
With Demister
Col umn
Overhead
Combined Condensate
Mechanical Oil
Separator
Carbon Adsorption
of Oil
Process Slowdown
Steam
Range
Average
Range
Average
Range
Average
Range
Average
Range
Average
Range
Average
Range
Average
Range
Average
Range
Average
Range
Average
Range
Average
Flow
Rate
(L/d)
53 747 - 83 649
(14 200 - 22 100 gpd)
71 158 (18 800 gpd)
46 934 - 64 345
(12 400 - 17 000 gpd)
58 289 (15 400 gpd)
3785 - 25 360
(1000 - 6700 gpd)
12 869 (3400 gpd)
1043 - 1724 kg/hr
(2300 - 3800 Ib/hr)
1270 kg/hr (2800 Ib/hr)
Total
Dissolved
Solids @
pH 500° C (mg/L)
9.7 - 10.6 2000 - 8000
10.1 4700
4.1 - 9.6
6.5
5.1 - 7.9 10 - 200
6.6 85
5.2 - 6.0 0 - 22
5.6 7.5
5.1 - 7.9 0 - 10
6.6 4.2
5.2 - 6.0 0 - 10
5.6 4.4
4.2 - 6.9
5.6
— ._
6.1 - 8.7 17 600 - 36 100
6.8 26 800
• — --
Total
P as P04
(mg/L)
500 - 9900
3400
710 - 10 400
3300
58 - 110
81
0.6 - 2.3
1.3
1.3 - 6.4
3.9
0.6 - 2.5
1.4
0.5 - 4.3
1.6
5100 --25 100
13 800
— — — —
Oil
(mg/L)
70 - 240
160
70 - 560
220
6 - 29
12
10 - 50
27
6-29
12
10 - 50
27
8 - 30
19
5-25
15
1 - 23
10
39 - 5600
910
— — ——
*Values were taken from the laboratory stream analyses except for the TDS (total dissolved solids) and flow rate data.
TDS were determined from conductivity measurements and calibration curves derived from laboratory results. Extreme
values were generally ignored.
-------
TABLE 6. ANALYSES OF CONDENSATE SAMPLES
ro
CO
Sample Number
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Conductivity
Micros iemens/cm
4
4
24
24
9
9
25
95
3
16
Oil
mg/L
8.7
5.4*
80
0.2*
0.7
0.0*
135
8.2
4-. 8
52.7
*Processed in laboratory carbon adsorption column,
-------
TABLE 7. ANALYSES OF PHOSPHATE CLEANING SOLUTION
ro
Concentrated Phosphate
PH
Oil (mg/L)
Aluminum (mg/L)
*Etch Activity
(mg/m2)
Reaction Products
Ultra-Filtered
10.55
90
213
None
Settled
10.55
254
370
207
None
Settled
Adsorbed on
10.55
4
440
258
None
and
Carbon
* Acceptable etch activity is 215-269 mg/m for the 30 second test.
-------
TABLE 8. ANALYSIS OF PHOSPHATE CONCENTRATE
Items
Total Solids
Total Dissolved Solids
Ortho Phosphate
Total P as PO4
so4
Al
Oil
Concentration (mg/L)
21,800
20,500
0
9,600
6,700
490
254
po
tn
-------
TABLE 9 COST EVALUATION FOR A 1,100,000 L/d (300,000 GPD)
EVAPORATIVE PROCESS PLANT
Materials
Labor
Heat Recovery
System .
Capital Costs ($1,000)
Thermopure
Steam System
pH Control
Wastewater Pretreatment
Slowdown Treatment
Chemical Cleaning System
Operating Expenses ($/day)
Utilities:
Steam
Electricity
Chemicals:
Limestone
Sulfuric Acid
Phosphoric Clean. Acid
Labor:
Operating, Lab., R&M
Depreciation (5%/yr)
Operating Credits ($/day)
Material Reuse:
High Purity Water
Phosphate
Net Operating Cost/Credit
20,230 kg/h
(44,600 Ib/h
240 kw
$810
383
35
120
118
33
$1499
0
115
94 kg/h (207 Ib/h) 12
59 kg/h (131 Ib/h) 63
1.6 kg/h (3.4 Ib/h) 16
1 man
240
205
38,800 L/h
(10,240 gal/h)
50% of 107 kg/h
(236 Ib/h)
day
614
736
$1350/
day
Boiler
System
$810
142
35
120
118
33
$1258
2141
115
12
63
16
240
172
$2759/
day
614
736
$1350/
day
($/day)
($/1000 L)
($/1000 gal)
$699(Cr.) $1409
0.62(Cr.) 1.24
2.33(Cr;) 4.70
26
-------
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. "I. Alcoa Water Processes for Environmental Control. II.
Alcoa Thermopure Process in a Utility Complex". A Seminar
September 27, 1974 by Alcoa and sponsored by the Office of
Environmental Affairs, Department of Commerce, Washington,
D. C. 20230.
2. "Alcoa Thermopure Process for High Quality Water Production
from Wastewater", M. H. Brown, H. J. Hittner, Alcoa
Laboratories, Alcoa Center, Pa. 15069. Thirty-Fifth Annual
International Water Conference, Pittsburgh, Pa., October,
1974.
3. "Transcript of Proceedings (Edited)", Aluminum Company of
America, presented at Best Available Technology (BAT)
Meeting, Effluent Standards and Water Quality Informat on
Advisory Committee, February 26, 1975.
4. "Alcoa Thermopure Process for Wastewater Treatment"
M. H. Brown, Alcoa Laboratories. Presented at Annual
Meeting of the Indiana Water Pollution Control Association,
Indianapolis, Indiana, November, 1975.
27
-------
APPENDIX WARRICK PILOT PLANT DATA FROM THREE
SERIES OF TESTS
TABLE A-1. WARRICK PILOT PLANT DATA - FIRST SERIES OF TESTS (JANUARY 3 TO MAY 7, 1975)
ro
DATA
RAW CCL WASTE
Volume Treated - L/Day (gpd)
Total Dissolved Solids - mg/L
P as P04 - mg/L
PROCESS SLOWDOWN
Temperature - °C (°F)
PH
Total Dissolved Solids - mg/L
P as P04 - mg/L
Volume - L/Day (gpd)
PRODUCT WATER
Total Dissolved Column
Solids - mg/L Overhead
P as P04 - mg/L Column
Overhead
Volume - L/Day (gpd) Column
Overhead
Total
HEAT RECOVERY SYSTEM
Stack Gas In - °C (°F)
Stack Gas Out - °C (°F)
Steam Use - kg/d (Lbs/Day)
1/3
17 000
88 (191)
17 250
3.7
3.7
27 782 (7340)
8 251 (2180)
36 033 (9520)
236 (457)
118 (245)
3421 (7542)
DATE
1/6 1/11
in ?nn
88 (191) 87 (189)
15 200 10 720
*5 '7
27 479 ( 7 260) 29 046 ( 7 674)
19 531 ( 5 160) 13 702 ( 3 620)
47 010 (12 420) 42 748 (11 294)
264 (508) 291 (555)
119 (247) 114 (238)
20 722 (45 685) 20 987 (46 269)
1/21
61 923 (16 360)
• 6 846
11 700
91 (195)
6.1
23 400
16 000
16 351 (4320)
36
0
5.1
3.6
22 861 ( 6 040)
22 710 ( 6 000)
45 571 (12 040)
284 (543)
113 (236)
18 498 (40 782)
1/22
18 200
81 (177)
20 167
18 353 (4849)
13 853 (3660)
32 206 (8509)
223 (434)
102 (216)
19 769 (43 584)
ACTUAL OPERATING TIME
Hrs/Day
10
11
(continued)
-------
TABLE A-l. (continued)
DATA
RAW CCL WASTE
Volume Treated - L/Day (gpd).
Total Dissolved Solids - mg/L
P as P04 - mg/L
PROCESS SLOWDOWN
Temperature - °C (°F)
pH
Total Dissolved Solids - mg/L
P as P04 - mg/L
Volume - L/Day (gpd)
PRODUCT WATER
Total Dissolved Column
Solids - mg/L Overhead
P as P04 - mg/L Column
uverneao
Volume - L/Day (gpd) Column
Overhead
Total
HEAT RECOVERY SYSTEM
Stack Gas In - °C (°F)
Stack Gas Out - °C (°F)
Steam Use - kg/d (Lbs/Day)
ACTUAL OPERATING TIME
Mrs /Day
1/23
36 654 (9684)
1874
DUU
80 (176
6C
.0
20 000
O&DU
3406 (900)
"3/1 Q
i n
1 U
i ~if\
I /u
.
-------
TABLE A-l. (continued)
DATA
RAW CCL WASTE
Volume Treated - L/Day (gpd)
Total Dissolved Solids - mg/L
P as P04 - mg/L
PROCESS SLOWDOWN
Temperature - °C (°F)
pH
Total Dissolved Solids - mg/L
P as P04 - mg/L
Volume - L/Day (gpd)
o PRODUCT WATER
Total Dissolved Column
Solids - mg/L Overhead
P as P04 - mg/L Column
Overhead
Volume - L/Day (gpd) Column
Overhead
Total
HEAT RECOVERY SYSTEM
Stack Gas In - °C (°F)
Stack Gas Out - °C (°F)
Steam Use - kg/d (Lbs/Day)
1/31
40 870 (10 798)
4380
2340
78 (172)
6.9
11 564
4900
17 297 (4570)
24
20
2.6
1.8
12 407 (3278)
11 166 (2950)
23 573 (6228)
18 (369)
97 (207)
14 555 (32 088)
2/13
24 708 (6528)
1633
81 (177)
3833
70
30
8743 (2310)
224 (435)
103 (218)
DATE-
2/17
29 478 (7788)
3340
3400
76 (169)
6.8
9990
8900
2
4
1.1
0.9
11 771 (3110)
211 (411)
101 (213)
2/18
34 761 (9184)
3500
80 (176)
13 583
7949 (2100)
4.1
3.3
12 354 (3264)
14 459 (3820)
26 813 (7084)
247 (477)
109 (228)
21 341 (47 049)
2/19
30 541 (8069)
3150
2000
78 (172)
7.4
13 302
6400
7343 (1940)
2
8
2
12
10 481 (2769)
12 718 (3660)
23 199 (6129)
246 (474)
109 (228)
19 303 (42 555)
ACTUAL OPERATING TIME
Hrs/Day
10
16
15
(continued)
-------
TABLE A-l. (continued)
co
DATA
RAW CCL WASTE
Volume Treated - L/Day (gpd)
Total Dissolved Solids - mg/L
P as PO^ - mg/L
PROCESS SLOWDOWN
Temperature - °C (°F)
PH
Total Dissolved Solids - mg/L
P as P04 - mg/L
Volume - L/Day (gpd)
PRODUCT WATER
Total Dissolved Column
Solids - mg/L Overhead
P as P0« - mg/L Column
Overhead
Volume - L/Day (gpd) Column
Overhead
Total
HEAT RECOVERY SYSTEM
Stack Gas In - °C (°F)
Stack Gas Out - °C (°F)
Steam Use - kg/d (Lbs/Day)
ACTUAL OPERATING TIME
Mrs/Day
2/20
17 237 (4554)
2900
76 (159)
15 670
2612 (690)
3.5
2
7 116 (1180)
10 144 (2680)
17 260 (3860)
257 (495)
129 (233)
17 919 (39 504)
7
2/24
77 880 (20 576)
6380
74 (165)
6.7
9800
7300
52 990 (14 000)
0
0
1.3
0.8
10 734 (2836)
14 156 (3740)
24 890 (6576)
267 (512)
118 (245)
20 575 (45 360)
8
DATE
2/25
36 896 (9748)
5275
78 (173)
12 667
14 497 (3830)
2.5
2.3
13 013 (3438)
9 387 (2480)
22 400 (5918)
253 (488)
117 (243)
16 863 (37 176)
9
2/26
39 232 (10 365)
5038
76 (169)
10 325
19 985 (5280)
2.4
2.9
10 Oil (2645)
9 235 (2440)
19 246 (5085)
267 (512)
119 (247)
22 173 (48 884)
14
2/27
24 375 (6440)
4967
76 (169)
15 389
6624 (1750)
2.2
2.8
8 630 (2280)
9 122 (2410)
17 752 (4690)
261 (501)
117 (242)
18 250 (40 235)
22
(continued)
-------
TABLE A-1. (continued)
DATA
RAW CCL WASTE
Volume Treated - L/Day (gpd)
Total Dissolved Solids - mg/L
P as P04 - mg/L
PROCESS SLOWDOWN
Temperature - °C (°F)
PH
Total Dissolved Solids - mg/L
P as P04 - mg/L
Volume - L/Day (gpd)
PRODUCT WATER
Total Dissolved Column
Solids - mg/L Overhead
P as P04 - mg/L Column
Overhead
Volume - L/Day (gpd) Column
Overhead
Total
HEAT RECOVERY SYSTEM
Stack Gas In - °C (°F)
Stack Gas Out - °C (°F)
Steam Use - kg/d (Lbs/Day)
ACTUAL OPERATING TIME
Hrs/Day
2/28
21 650 (5720)
3033
76 (169)
6.4
13 333
5100
5526 (1460)
16
2
3.7
2.6
10 068 (2660)
6 056 (1600)
16 124 (4260)
263 (505)
118 (245)
17 282 (38 100)
3
3/3
21 029 (5556)
4520
73 (163)
9500
3429 (906)
3.5
2.5
17 600 (4650)
233 (451)
110 (231)
4
DATE
3/4
18 490 (4885)
3720
4600
71 (160)
7.1
19 200
9300
1684 (445)
16
0
0.6
1.1
16 805 (4440)
221 (430)
108 (226)
6
3/5
62 831 (16 600)
4650
73 (164)
7.9
9010
9100
36 715 (9700)
0
0
2.3
26 117 (6900)
245 (473)
113 (235)
16 828 (37 100)
3
(continued)
3/6
38 948 (10 290)
3340
2200
76 (168)
7.5
8600
5200
15 254 (4030)
18
2
0.8
1.0
25 057 (6620)
253 (488)
111 (232)
16 375 (36 100)
3
-------
TABLE A-l. (continued)
DATA
RAW CCL WASTE
Volume Treated - L/Day (gpd)
Total Dissolved Solids - mg/L
P as P04 - mg/L
PROCESS BLOWDOWN
Temperature - °C (°F)
pH
Total Dissolved Solids - mg/L
P as P04 - mg/L
Volume - L/Day (gpd)
<., PRODUCT WATER
00 Total Dissolved Column
Solids - mg/L Overhead
P as PO* - mg/L Column
Overhead
Volume - L/Day (gpd) Column
Overhead
Total
HEAT RECOVERY SYSTEM
Stack Gas In - °C (°F)
Stack Gas Out - °C (°F)
Steam Use - kg/d (Lbs/Day)
3/10
54 031 (14 275)
5900
81 (178)
6.5
7900
2100
22 237 (5875)
70*
4
0.7
1.0
19 186 (5069)
12 608 (3331)
31 794 (8400)
119 (400)
119 (247)
18 225 (40 180)
3/11
40 045 (10 580)
2900
600
78 (172)
6.8
12 610
2900
7835 (2070)
0
0
1.6
1.6
18 092 (4780)
14 118 (3730)
33 210 (8510)
232 (450)
121 (249)
22 191 (48 922)
DATE
3/12
33 857 (8945)
4833
77 (171)
7.9
21 300
7800
5852 (1546)
4
6
1.1
0.8
13 168 (3479)
14 837 (3920)
28 005 (7399)
233 (452)
123 (253)
18 626 (41 064)
3/13
37 699 (9960)
3810
1600
73 (164)
8.5
16 700
10 500
9690 (2560)
52
12
25
1.5
15 519 (4100)
12 188 (3220)
27 707 (7320)
226 (438)
121 (250)
18 824 (41 500)
3/14
26 862 (7097)
3080
3400
78 (173)
6.5
17 600
5200
4534 (1198)
142
61.6
0
3.7
12 755 (3370)
9 538 (2520)
22 293 (5890)
207 (405)
121 (250)
18 594 (40 992)
ACTUAL OPERATING TIME
Hrs/Day
*Foaming Occurred
(continued)
-------
TABLE A-l. (continued)
GO
DATA
RAW CCL WASTE
Volume Treated - L/Day (gpd)
Total Dissolved Solids - mg/L
P as P04 - mg/L
PROCESS SLOWDOWN
Temperature - °C (°F)
PH
Total Dissolved Solids - mg/L
P as P04 - mg/L
Volume - L/Day (gpd)
PRODUCT WATER
Total Dissolved Column
Solids - mg/L Overhead
P as P04 - mg/L Column
Overhead
Volume - L/Day (gpd) Column
Overhead
Total
HEAT RECOVERY SYSTEM
Stack Gas In - °C (°F)
Stack Gas Out - °C (°F)
Steam Use - kg/d (Lbs/Day)
ACTUAL OPERATING TIME
Hrs/Day
3/13
37 445 (9893)
9893
3650
84 (183)
6.2
15 350
7250
5371 (1419)
16
2.8
2.7
2.8
17 320 (4576)
14 754 (3898)
32 074 (8474)
249 (481)
126 (258)
19 947 (43 976)
3
3/19
33 815 (8934)
8934
5950
74 (166)
6.4
16 450
850
11 980 (3165)
7
5
4.8
3.1
12 948 (3421)
8 887 (2348)
21 835 (5769)
227 (440)
113 (236)
17 136 (37 779)
5
DATE
3/22
34 841 (9205)
9205
2900
87 (188)
6.6
6700
3200
6298 (1664)
24
4
5.5
0.4
15 833 (4183)
12 710 (3358)
28 543 (7541)
229 (445)
127 (261)
15 381 (33 910)
8
3/27
35 624 (9412)
9412
1900
84 (184)
6.8
9200
6329 (1672)
115
10
18 660 (4930)'
10 636 (2810)
29 296 (7740)
213 (415)
114 (237)
15 688 (34 586)
5
4/23
21 730 (5741)
5741
3950
77 (170)
6.0
15 250
4164 (1100)
99
29
9 777 (2583)
7 793 (2058)
17 570 (4641)
224 (436)
112 (233)
8669 (19 112)
5
(continued)
-------
TABLE A-l. (continued)
CO
DATA
RAW CCL WASTE
Volume Treated - L/Day (gpd)
Total Dissolved Solids - mg/L
P as P04 - mg/L
PROCESS SLOWDOWN
Temperature - °C (°F)
PH
Total Dissolved Solids - mg/L
P as P04 - mg/L
Volume - L/Day (gpd)
PRODUCT WATER
Total Dissolved Column
Solids - mg/L Overhead
P as P04 - mg/L Column
Overhead
Volume - L/Day (gpd) Column
Overhead
Total
HEAT RECOVERY SYSTEM
Stack Gas In - °C (°F)
Stack Gas Out - °C (°F)
Steam Use - kg/d (Los/Day)
4/24
22 930 (6058)
3730
80 (176)
7.2
14 800
5893 (1557)
57
3.0
9 455 (2498)
7 203 (1903)
16 658 (4501)
240 (464)
116 (241)
8 299 (18 296)
DATE
5/6
36 294 (9589)
1750
84 (184)
6.5
6400
6139 (1622)
275
12
18 384 (4857)+
11 771 (3110)
30 155 (7967)
201 (393)
112 (233)
14 418 (31 787)
5/7
35 912 (9486)
2000
82 (179)
6.6
7000
9932 (2624)
212
15.5
14 307 (3780)
11 665 (3082)
25 972 (6862)
209 (408)
109 (229)
11 698 (25 790)
ACTUAL OPERATING TIME
Hrs/Day -
+ Cleaned heat recovery coil (5/5/75)
-------
TABLE A-2. RAW WASTE ANALYSES - FIRST SERIES OF TESTS (JANUARY 3 TO MAY 7, 1975)
Date
1/21
1/23
2/1 7A
2/1 7B
2/1 7C
2/1 70
2/1 9 A
Co 2/19B
cr> 2/1 9C
2/24A
2/24B
3/4
3/6
3/7
3/11
3/13
3/14
3/1 8A
3/1 8B
3/19
3/20
3/26
5/7
_E!L
10.6
10.1
9.8
9.8
9.9
9.7
9.9
10.6
9.7
9.8
6.9
10.1
9.9
6'. 5
10.1
10.0
10.0
9.6
9.9
9.8
10.0
9.9
9.9
Pnnrfnp—
uUIIUUl*
tivity
(uS)
9 400
2 680
2 050
2 100
3 100
2 800
2 450
13 900
1 940
2 500
3 600
3 300
3 520
3 590
4 450
2 700
2.950
1 600
2 960
2 520
3 600
2 600
3 200
Suspended Solids
at 105°C
(mg/L)
21
3
82
39
—
231
73
157
42
264
174
20
13
3
22
7
10
6
23
36
43
17
33
at 500°C
(mg/L)
12-
0
50
1
—
67
21
58
0
40
70
12
0
0
1
0
0
0
6
14
3
0
8
Dissolved Solids
at 105°C
(mg/L)
13 594
2 660
2 220
6 390
—
3 580
3 150
23 600
2 390
3 260
4 800
4 140
4 640
5 020
6 400
3 440
3 840
1 900
3 700
3 300
4 800
3 400
4 264
at 500°C
(mg/L)
11 200
2 286
1 870
5 840
-_
2 740
2 450
18 900
1 870
2 640
4 120
3 300
3 950
4 030
5 000
2 720
3 070
1 200
3 200
2 700
3 900
2 600
3 366
Oil
(mg/L)
545
105
305
123
118
173
168
800
80
405
232
382
180
110
233
151
27
87
205
157
181
177
133
Phosphorous as PO*
Total
(mg/L)
10 900
480
2 500
2 400
3 600
2 600
1 800
8 100
1 100
1 500
2.600
5 200
2 500
1 600
1 400
1 800
1 800
800
1 800
1 500
2 600
800
1 320
Dissolved
(mg/L)
8 760
360
1 300
1 400
2 600
1 600
1 500
6 700
800
1 100
1 000
3 700
2 100
1 100
1 300
1 500
1 500
800
1 400
1 300
2 300
800
1 100
-------
TABLE A-3. FEED MAKE-UP ANALYSES - FIRST SERIES OF TESTS (JANUARY 3 TO HAY 7, 1975)
CO
r~-A..~ Suspended Solids
Date
1/21
1/23
I/ 29 A
1/29B
1/31
2/17
2/19
3/4
3/6
3/7
3/11
3/13
3/14
3/1 8A
3/1 8B
3/1 9 A
3/19B
3/20
3/26
5/7
pH
7.2
7.3
6.2
6.3
6.0
6.4
6.7
6.7
7.4
9.9
6.8
6.5
6.7
6.3
6.0
6.0
5.6
5.9
6.7
6.6
Wl/l IVJU^
tivity
(uS)
11 400
2 040
4 400
4 050
4 090
2 950
3 050
3 400
3 080
3 090
2 620
3 500
2 900
2 900
3 400
4 150
6.200
4 800
2 700
3 800
at 105°C
(mg/L)
41
191
95
29
18
114
67
20
5
0
30
19
21
17
370
539
35
36
81
318
at 500°C
(mg/L)
19
325
24
0
5
66
48
14
3
0
3
0
1
0
230
399
3
10
41
200
Dissolved Solids
at 105°C
(mg/L)
16 256
2 134
6 256
5 252
5 082
3 740
3 660
4 260
3 990
3 850
3 420
4 480
3 590
4 000
4 400
5 400
8 000
6 800
3 400
4 830
at 500°C
(mg/L)
6 846
1 874
5 312
4 466
4 380
3 340
3 150
3 720
3 340
3 230
2 900
3 810
3 080
3 400
3 900
4 700
7 200
6 000
2 900
4 104
Oil
(mg/L)
318
87
40
109
47
100
106
367
226
129
176
117
192
102
133
279
279
237
164
180
Phosphorous as POa
Total
(mg/L)
11 700
600
3 040
2 920
2 340
3 400
2 000
4 600
2 200
1 700
600
1 600
3 400
1 600
1 600
2 600
4 800
3 700
1 500
2 440
Dissolved
(mg/L)
9 100
400
2 900
2 100
1 760
1 900
1 800
3 400
1 500
1 100
600
1 300
1 100
1 300
1 500
2 400
4 200
3 400
1 300
2 400
-------
TABLE A-4. COLUMN CONDENSATE ANALYSES - FIRST SERIES OF TESTS (JANUARY 3 TO MAY 7, 1975)
CO
oo
Date
1/21
1/23
I/ 29 A
1/29B
1/31
2/17
2/19
2/24
2/28
3/4
3/5A
3/5B
3/6
3/7
3/10
3/11
3/12
3/13
3/14
3/18A
3/1 8B
3/1 9A
3/1 98
3/26
5/7
PH
7.2
7.1
6.6
5.0
6.6
6.2
5.4
5.6
5.9
6.5
6.4
6.7
6.1
6'.1
6.4
6.4
6.5
7.6
7.0
6.3
6.0
5.5
6.8
6.5
6.9
tivlty
(uS)
12
448
8 500
14
5
5.1
9.5
5.2
10.1
3.1
6.8
6.4
2.6
23.6
12.3
6.0
9.6
86.0
188
6.0
9.3
16.1
11.2
35.0
118.0
Suspended Solids
at 105°C
(mg/L)
25
11
13
12
3
0
5
16
10
3
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
15
0
0
10
0
4
62
at 500°C
(mg/L)
16
0
1
4
0
0
1
2
0
3
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
11
0
0
0
0
3
22
Dissolved Solids
at 105°C
(mg/L)
66
414
38
22
30
10
2
6
24
18
4
22
18
34
88
18
8
86
192
22
38
48
32
42
156
at 500°C
(mg/L)
36
348
22
20
24
2
2
0
16
16
4
0
18
34
70
0
52
142
2
30
14
0
24
80
Oil
(mg/L)
257
19
4
162
3
6
0
9
14
6
13
3
10
20
4
9
14
18
8
13
9
4
10
8
Phosphorous as P0a
Total
(mg/L)
5.1
170
40
40
2.6
1.1
2.0
1.3
3.7
0.6
0.6
0.8
11.3
0.7
1.6
1 ]
25.0
61.6
1.2
4.2
4.5
5.2
5.5
49.4
Dissolved
(mg/L)
5.1
164
3.9
6.2
2.1
1.1
1.8
1.1
2.6
0.6
0.4
0.8
10.7
0.6
1.3
1 1
25.0
60.4
1.1
3.8
4.1
4.0
4.9
42.8
-------
TABLE A-5. OVERHEAD CONDENSATE ANALYSES - FIRST SERIES OF TESTS (JANUARY 3 TO MAY 7, 1975)
CO
r^j..-_ Suspended Solids
Date
1/21
1/23
1/29
1/29
1/31
2/17
2/19
2/24
2/28
3/4
3/5A
3/5B
3/6
3/7
3/10
3/11
3/12
3/13
3/14
3/1 8A
3/1 8B
3/1 9 A
3/1 9B
3/26
5/7
pH
6.6
7.1
5.5
5.7
5.1
4.9
5.1
5.3
5.9
5.7
6.2
5.9
5.7
5.8
5.3
5.9
5.7
6.3
6.1
5.7
5.8
5.6
5.8
5.6
5.0
WIIUUW
tivlty
(uS)
22
14
12
12
4
5.6
6.3
5.7
6.5
4.0
6.5
4.9
3.5
16.7
560
4.9
6.1
9.0
9.2
7.3
10.8
7.3
8.2
4.4
8.8
at 105°C
(mg/L 5
28
28
15
6
4
0
3
25
27
5
6
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
13
20
at 500°C
(mg/L)
15
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
4
0
5
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
Dissolved Solids
at 105°C
(mg/L)
10
36
36
6
28
6
8
12
10
26
24
10
24
20
16
0
8
26
24
22
34
46
56
14
36
at 500°C
(mg/L)
0
10
22
12
20
4
8
0
2
0
4
0
2
8
4
0
6
12
0
0
34
2
8
4
0
Oil
(mg/L)
79
15
17
10
25
24
31
285
103
40
73
28
35
81
73
49
31
56
47
60
31
55
9
474
308
Phosphorous as POa
Total
(mg/L)
3.6
4.2
10.8
2.9
1.8
0.7
1.2
0.8
2.6
1.1
1.5
2.3
1.0
11.7
1.0
1.6
0.8
1.5
3.7
2.6
3.0
2.3
3.8
0.4
0.5
Dissolved
(rog/L)
3.6
4.2
10.8
2.9
1.5
0.6
1.2
0.8
2.1
1.0
1.3
0.8
0.8
11.2
0.8
1.5
0.8
1.3
2.9
2.1
2.8
2.0
3.7
0.4
0.5
-------
TABLE A-6. PROCESS SLOWDOWN ANALYSES - FIRST SERIES OF TESTS (JANUARY 3 TO MAY 7, 1975)
r^A..~_ Suspended Solids
Date
1/21
1/23
1/29A
1/29B
1/31
2/17
2/19
2/24
2/28
3/4
3/5A
3/5B
3/6
3/7
3/10
3/11
3/12
3/13
3/14
3/1 8A
3/1 8B
3/1 9A
3/1 9B
3/20
3/26
5/7
_E!L
6.1
6.5
6.5
6.5
6.9
6.8
7.4
6.7
6.4
7.1
7.7
7.9
7.5
7.8
6.5
6.8
7.9
8.5
6.5
6.2
6.2
6.4
6.3
6.0
6.6
6.3
W1IUU\*
tivlty
(uS)
17 200
14 000
16 500
25 000
9 500
7 900
9 000
13 000
12 200
10 000
7 000
6 350
6 400
5 800
5 500
8 000
12.000
12 400
10 400
8 000
9 400
9 950
13 100
15 600
6 300
10 600
at 105°C
(mg/L)
1 823
447
978
6 336
2 826
194
125
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
2 050
*
*
*
*
*
164
3 900
3 900
2 400
6 310
at 500°C
(mg/L)
1 664-
270
614
5 012
2 140
110
91
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
1 520
*
*
*
*
*
80
3 000
2 800
1 700
4 950
Dissolved Solids
at 105°C
(mg/L)
28 610
20 000
25- 900
39 080
3 290
12 500
16 200
27 900*
23 800*
23 400*
12 700*
11 300*
10 400*
9 200*
9 410*
14 930
26 900*
21 400*
22 100*
16 200*
20 500*
14 500'
24 400
25 000
7 900
14 600
at 500°C
(mg/L)
23 400
17 340
21 900
34 070
11 564
9 970
13 300
23 800*
20 000*
19 200*
10 300*
9 010*
8 600*
7 660*
7 980*
12 610
21 300*
16 700*
17 600*
13 600*
17 100*
12 200
20 700
21 200
6 700
12 800
Oil
(mg/L)
269
353
861
711
238
676
1 310
1 670
432
1 060
377
296
279
186
187
690
512
868
905
361
453
633
934
681
414
520
Phosphorous as POa
Total
(mg/L)
16 000
6 260
16 400
16 000
4 900
8 900
6 400
7 300
5 100
9 300
9 800
9 100
5 200
2 400
2 100
2 900
7 800
10 500
5 200
6 300
8 200
7 600
TO 100
13 800
3 700
5 800
Dissolved
(mg/L)
14 840
5 140
11 300
13 800
4 760
5 800
5 600
2 000
2 500
7 300
3 700
2 900
4 700
2 200
2 000
2 300
6 400
5 200
4 400
5 100
6 400
5 700
7 100
10 700
2 900
4 800
*Sample would not filter - reported as total solids.
-------
TABLE A-7. WARRICK PILOT PLANT DATA - SECOND SERIES OF TESTS (JUNE 2 TO JULY 10, 1975}
DATA
RAW CCL WASTE
Volume Treated - L/Day (gpd)
Total Dissolved Solids - mg/L
P as P04 - mg/L
PROCESS BLOWDOWN
Temperature - °C (°F)
PH
Total Dissolved Solids - mg/L
P as P04 - mg/L
Volume - L/Day (gpd)
PRODUCT WATER
Total Dissolved Column
Solids - mg/L Overhead
P as PO^ - mg/L Column
Overhead
Volume - L/Day (gpd) Column
Overhead
Total
HEAT RECOVERY SYSTEM
Stack Gas In - °C (°F) *
Stack Gas Out - °C (°F)*
Steam Use - kg/d (Lbs/Day)
6/2
53 932 (14 249)
1900
___ _
93 (200)
6.5
8300
9425 (2490)
20.0
10.4
34 023 ( 8 989)
10 484 ( 2 770)
44 507 (11 759)
17 660 (38 934)
6/3
65 223 (17 232)
1026
400
94 (202)
7.35
11 100
4200
4164 (1100)
46.0
18.0
19.0
0.8
36 306 ( 9 592)
20 969 ( 5 540)
57 275 (15 132)
23 133 (51 000)
DATE
6/4
56 870 (15 025)
2198
480
94 (201)
7.55
27 300
2600
2332 (616)
108
5.0
28.5
0.7
36 260 ( 9 580)
18 282 ( 4 830)
54 542 (14 410)
22 906 (50 500)
6/5
50 723 (13 401)
2244
660
94 (201)
7.27
30 700
2600
3183 (841)
86.0
0.0
26.0
0.6
29 902 ( 7 900)
17 638 ( 4 660)
47 540 (12 560)
19 867 (43 800)
6/6
47 914 (12 659)
2872
2260
94 (201)
7.75
26 200
7700
5901 (1559)
90.0
10.2
25.0
0.4
29 145 ( 7 700)
12 869 ( 3 400)
42 014 (11 100)
ACTUAL OPERATING TIME
Mrs/Day
* Not measured - portable steam boiler in use.
(continued)
-------
TABLE A-7. (continued)
ro
DATA
RAW CCL WASTE
Volume Treated - L/Day (gpd)
Total Dissolved Solids - mg/L
P as P04 - mg/L
PROCESS SLOWDOWN
Temperature - °C (°F)
PH
Total Dissolved Solids - mg/L
P as P04 - mg/L
Volume - L/Day (gpd)
PRODUCT WATER
Total Dissolved Column
Solids - mg/L Overhead
P as P04 - mg/L Column
Overhead
Volume - L/Day (gpd) Column
Overhead
Total
6/10
71 302 (18 838)
5600
----
95 (203)
7.5
15 700
27 964 (7388)
44.0
13.0
33 838 ( 8 940)
9 500 ( 2 510)
43 338 (11 450)
6/11
52 990 (14 000)
2612
1120
94 (202)
6.5
3500
9400
1779 (470)
334
12.0
170
0.0
33 232 ( 8 780)
17 979 ( 4 750)
51 211 (13 530)
DATE
6/12
51 798 (13 685)
3144
1506
92 (197)
6.4
44 000
21 000
2971 (785)
169
15.0
98.0
1.3
31 605 ( 8 350)
17 222 ( 4 550)
48 827 (12 900)
6/13
50 927 (13 455)
4400
93 (199)
6.9
33 000
3463 (915)
320
6.4
29 031 ( 7 670)
18 433 ( 4 870)
47 464 (12 540)
6/18
45 920 (12 132)
7500
94 (202)
7.9
42 000
26 000
7388 (1952)
14.0
4.3
27 101 ( 7 160)
11 431 (3 020)
38 532 (10 180)
HEAT RECOVERY SYSTEM
Stack Gas In - °C (°F)*
Stack Gas Out - °C (°F) *
Steam Use - kg/d (Lbs/Day) 22 906 (50 500) 24 131 (53 200) 22 589 (49 800) 23 950 (52 800) 19 822 (43 700)
ACTUAL OPERATING-TIME
Hrs/Day ___ 3 7 9 3. 1
*Not measured - portable steam boiler in use. (continued)
-------
TABLE A-7. (continued)
oo
DATA
RAW CCL WASTE
Volume Treated - L/Day (gpd)
Total Dissolved Solids - mg/L
P as P04 - mg/L
PROCESS BLOWDOWN
Temperature - °C (°F)
PH
Total Dissolved Solids - mg/L
P as P04 - mg/L
Volume - L/Day (gpd)
PRODUCT WATER
Total Dissolved Column
Solids - mg/L Overhead
P as P04 - mg/L Column
Overhead
Volume - L/Day (gpd) Column
Overhead
Total
6/26
61 650 (16 288)
11 800
7340
93 (199)
8.2
40 000
15 400
18 376 (4855)
605
358
30 545 ( 8 070)
12 729 ( 3 363)
43 274 (11 433)
DATE
7/9
58 043 (15 335)
8100
92 (198)
7.8
40 000
11 752 (3105)
288
10.0
30 386 ( 8 028)
15 942 ( 4 212)
46 328 (12 230)
7/10
62 203 (16 434)
7142
4548
92 (198)
7.3
36 000
19 600
12 759 (3371)
894
10.0
472
0.7
30 522 ( 8 064)
18 921 ( 4 999)
49 443 (13 063)
HEAT RECOVERY SYSTEM
Stack Gas In - °C (°F)*
Stack Gas Out - °C (°F)*
Steam Use - kg/d (Lbs/Day)
23 950 (52 800)
18 210 (40 146)
25 980 (57 277)
ACTUAL OPERATING TIME
Hrs/Day
*Not measured - portable steam boiler in use.
-------
TABLE A-8. RAW WASTE AND FEED MAKE-UP ANALYSES - SECOND SERIES OF TESTS (JUNE 2 TO JULY 10, 1975)
RAW WASTE
rn~A..~- Suspended Solids
Date
6/3
6/4A
6/4B
6/5
6/6
6/11
6/1 2A
6/1 2B
6/12C
6/26
7/10
6/3
6/4A
6/4B
6/5
6/6
6/11
6/1 2A
6/1 2B
6/1 2C
6/19
6/26
7/10
pH
9.1
9.9
10.3
10.1
9.6
9.9
10.0
10.2
9.9
10.3
10.1
6.1
6.1
6.8
6.8
6.8
6.9
7.2
6.8
2.2
11.1
6.2
6.4
tivity
(uS)
1 120
1 825
2 350
1 940
2 790
2 900
1 740
5 000
2 210
9 100
6 100
1 240
2 360
2 250
1 975
2 550
2 300
3 340
3 950
8 800
15 900
11 600
6 600
at 105°C
(mg/L)
122
37
71
93
52
53
29
43
19
137
28
25
276
38
151
135
55
34
1 486
16
1 194
404
21
at 500°C
(mg/L)
55
20
56
37
15
15
0
9
0
32
10
FEED
14
186
23
102
90
12
3
1 220
0
432
122
4
Dissolved Solids
at 105°C
(mg/L)
1 232
2 198
3 298
2 464
3 772
3 658
2 164
7 012
2 678
14 900
8 688
MAKE-UP
1 350
2 852
2 418
2 296
2 970
3 072
4 420
5 840
6 966
25 000
15 900
8 468
at 500°C
(mg/L)
1 026
1 790
2 608
2 244
2 872
2 612
1 606
5 640
2 230
11 800
7 142
1 202
2 488
2 044
2 042
2 550
2 514
3 774
5 220
4 664
22 100
13 800
7 298
Oil
(mg/L)
163
96
164
183
171
206
124
302
135
1 200
317
56
98
143
93
144
163
63
132
61
2 253
1 043
215
Phosphorous as P0a
Total
(mg/L)
480
560
600
660
2 260
1 200
800
2 900
1 320
8 060
4 760
560
1 320
480
840
1 340
1 320
1 400
2 980
3 040
7 480
6 920
4 900
Dissolved
(mg/L)
400
560
360
660
2 260
1 120
800
2 400
1 320
7 340
4 540
400
1 080
360
840
800
1 320
1 340
2 420
2 600
6 680
6 700
4 000
-------
TABLE A-9. COLUMN AND OVERHEAD CONDENSATE ANALYSES - SECOND SERIES OF TESTS (JUNE 2 TO JULY 10, 1975)
COLUMN CONDENSATE
Date
6/3
6/4A
6/4B
6/5
6/6
6/11
6/1 2A
6/1 2B
6/1 2C
7/10
6/3
6/4A
6/4B
6/5
6/6
6/11
6/1 2A
6/1 2B
6/1 2C
6/26
7/10
pH
7.8
7.8
7.0
6.5
7.1
7.4
6.5
6.4
5.8
8.2
5.7
5.7
5.6
4.9
—
5.2
5.5
4.9
5.1
6.5
5.2
ConduC"
ti vi ty
(us)
58.2
90.0
169.0
117.5
113.0
440.0
134.5
49.0
440.0
1 125
4.5
3.4
3.9
7.0
—
4.9
7.7
4.7
9.3
17.5
7.4
Suspended Solids
at 105°C
(mg/L)
7
30
28
24
15
17
13
0
10
30
5
12
19
13
—
10
9
0
4
0
0
at 500°C
(mg/L)
6
22
21
17
3
6
2
0
0
10
OVERHEAD
5
10
12
8
—
2
1
0
0
0
0
Dissolved Solids
at 105°C
(mg/L)
50
124
186
122
126
396
148
62
484
1 160
CONDENSATE
18
24
20
12
—
13
16
80
22
1 246
10
at 500°C
(mg/L)
46
86
130
86
90
334
124
28
356
894
18
8
2
0
—
12
10
8
4
358
10
Oil
(mg/L)
3
10
6
6
9
15
14
8
13
55
37
17
11
36
87
14
17
14
73
70
22
Phosphorous as POa
Total
(mg/L)
19.0
21.6
38.6
28.8
29.0
170.0
60.0
36.0
232.0
664.0
0.8
0.4
1.1
0.6
0.6
0.0
2.1
0.6
1.1
3.1
0.7
Dissolved
(mg/L)
19.0
20.4
38.6
26.0
25.0
170.0
48.0
36.0
210.0
472.0
0.8
0.4
1.1
0.6
0.4
0.0
2.1
0.6
1.1
3.1
0.7
-------
TABLE A-10. PROCESS SLOWDOWN ANALYSES - SECOND SERIES OF TESTS-(JUNE 2 TO JULY 10, 1975)
r«n^,^_ Suspended Sol ids
Date
6/3
6/4A
6/4B
6/5
6/6
6/11
6/1 2A
6/1 2B
6/12C
6/19
6/26
7/10
pH
6.8
7.7
8.1
5.3
8.1
7.1
6.6
6.8
5.8
8.1
8.6
7.6
VWIIUUk*
tivity
(uS)
9 700
19 100
21 500
22 500
19 400
12 300
20 500
24 500
33 000
32 700
31 000
26 300
at 105°C
(mg/L)
9 038
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
at 500°C
(mg/L)
8 164
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Dissolved Solids
at 105°C
(mg/L)
12 100
47 300*
41 900*
50 400*
34 600*
29 100*
32 900*
43 000*
63 300*
79 600*
59 600*
50 000*
at 500°C
(mg/L)
11 100
40 500*
34 500*
42 900*
29 200*
18 300*
29 700*
39 300*
57 200*
54 900*
46 400*
41 400*
Oil
(mg/L)
367
924
267
1 056
1 061
516
649
290
254
3 738
5 318
1 324
Phosphorous as P0a
Total
(mg/L)
5 800
8 400
9 500
9 000
12 500
11 600
18 400
25 000
40 000
31 200
15 400
21 000
Dissolved
(mg/L)
4 200
3 400
1 800
2 600
7 700
9 400
16 400
18 000
29 600
26 000
15 400
19 600
Sample would not filter - reported as total solids.
-------
TABLE A-ll. WARRICK PILOT PLANT DATA - THIRD SERIES OF TESTS (SEPTEMBER 3 TO OCTOBER 3, 1975)
DATE
DATA
RAW CCL WASTE
Volume Treated - L/Day (gpd)
Total Dissolved Solids - mg/L
P as P04 - mg/L
PROCESS SLOWDOWN
Temperature - °C (°F)
PH
Total Dissolved Solids - mg/L
P as P04 - mg/L
Volume - L/Day (gpd)
PRODUCT WATER
Total Dissolved Column
Solids - mg/L Overhead
P as P04 - mg/L Column
Overhead
Volume - L/Day (gpd) Column
Overhead
Total
HEAT RECOVERY SYSTEM
Stack Gas In - °C (°F) *
Stack Gas Out - °C (°F) *
Steam Use - kg/d (Lbs/Day)
9/3
53 652 (14 175)
2500
----
94 (201)
6.4
17 600
3785 (1000)
27
5.0
51 306 (13 555)
25 391 (55 978)
9/8
71 711 (18 946)
6600
----
92 (198)
6.9
22 700
20 000 (5284)
20
4.3
51 711 (13 662)
25 644 (56 536)
9/9
66 858 (17 664)
3400
1250
92 (198)
6.7
25 550
7900
7112 (1879)
85
1.0
53
1.8
59 644 (15 758)
34 550 (76 170)
9/10
70 806 (18 707)
3550
360
93 (200)
6.9
34 450
7850
6317 (1669)
172
5.0
70.6
0.64
_---
64 489 (17 038)
35 517 (78 302)
ACTUAL OPERATING TIME
Hrs/Day
Not measured - portable steam boiler in use.
24
(continued)
-------
TABLE A-ll. (continued)
DATA
RAW CCL WASTE
Volume Treated - L/Day (gpd)
Total Dissolved Solids - mg/L
P as P04 - mg/L
PROCESS BLOWDOWN
Temperature - °C (°F)
pH
Total Dissolved Solids - mg/L
P as P04 - mg/L
Volume - L/Day (gpd)
PRODUCT WATER
Total Dissolved Column
-p« Solids - mg/L Overhead
00
P as P04 - mg/L Column
Overhead
Volume - L/Day (gpd) Column
Overhead
Total
HEAT RECOVERY SYSTEM
Stack Gas In - °C (°F) *
Stack Gas Out - °C (°F) *
Steam Use - kg/d (Lbs/Day)
ACTUAL OPERATING TIME
Mrs/Day
*Not measured - portable
9/11
73 826 (19 505)
2000
1000
91 (196)
7.1
20 800
9700
9584 (2532)
198
22
90
0.6
64 243 (16 973)
41 657 (91 838)
16
steam boiler in use.
DATE
9/17
76 461 (20 201)
6550
3450
92 (198)
7.3
29 250
8150
16 033 (4236)
10
0
6.4
1.3
60 428 (15 965)
36 132 (76 658)
19
9/18
68 781 (18 172)
4000
91 (196)
7.0
19 500
4700
16 003 (4228)
6.1
4.1
52 778 (13 944)
30 764 (67 824)
20
9/19
60 651 (16 024)
8000
----
90 (194)
7.6
32 200
4150
13 577 (3587)
3.3
3.5
47 074 (12 437)
24 755 (54 576)
8
(continued)
-------
TABLE A-ll. (continued)
DATA
Ur\ I r\
RAW CCL WASTE
Volume Treated - L/Day (gpd)
Total Dissolved Solids - mg/L
P as P04 - mg/L
PROCESS BLOWDOWN
Temperature - °C (°F)
PH
Total Dissolved Solids - mg/L
P as P04 - mg/L
Volume - L/Day (gpd)
PRODUCT WATER
Total Dissolved Column
Solids - mg/L Overhead
10 P as P04 - mg/L Column
Overhead
Volume - L/Day (gpd) Column
Overhead
Total
9/22
83 815 (22 144)
6900
92 (198)
6.6
24 000
25 390 (6708)
5.9
4.3
58 433 (15 438)
DATE
9/23
67 002 (17 701)
4700
3500
91 (196)
6.5
33 700
14 700
9175 (2424)
0.0
16
5.7
1.4
57 823 (15 277)
9/24
60 708 (16 039)
3200
91 (195)
6.4
36 100
16 100
5129 (1355)
5.3
36
2.8
55 579 (14 684)
9/25
78 698 .(20 792)
3400
92 (197)
6.2
19 900
12 000
16 529 (4367)
0.0
28
0.5
1.6
62 169 (16 425)
HEAT RECOVERY SYSTEM
Stack Gas In - °C (°F) ^
Stack Gas Out - °C (°F) *
Steam Use - kg/d (Lbs/Day)
26 751 (58 976) 28 674 (63 215) 27 205 (59 976) 30 578 (67 413)
ACTUAL OPERATING TIME
Hrs/Day
17
24
17
*Not measured - portable steam boiler in use.
(continued)
-------
TABLE A-11. (continued)
DATA
RAW CCL WASTE
Volume Treated - L/Day (gpd)
Total Dissolved Solids - mg/L
P as PO^ - mg/L
PROCESS SLOWDOWN
Temperature - °C (°F)
pH
Total Dissolved Solids - mg/L
P as P04 - mg/L
Volume - L/Day (gpd)
PRODUCT WATER
Total Dissolved Column
Solids - mg/L Overhead
P as PO^ - mg/L Column
Overhead
Volume - L/Day (gpd) Column
Overhead
Total
HEAT RECOVERY SYSTEM
Stack Gas In - °C (°F)*
Stack Gas Out - °C (°F)*
Steam Use - kg/d (Lbs/Day)
9/30
79 065 (20 889)
5400
92 (198)
6.7
23 500
17 589 (4647)
4.0
3.5
61 476 (16 242)
27 839 (61 375)
DATE
10/1
76 680 (20 259)
5400
92 (198)
6.5
30 100
14 200
12 926 (3415)
10.0
10.0
1.2
1.1
63 755 (16 844)
31 376 (69 172)
10/2
74 337 (19 640)
5900
2900
92 (198)
7.0
35 150
11 100
11 934 (3153)
0
0
1.5
0.5
62 403 (16 487)
_„
30 650 (67 573)
10/3
74 920 (19 794)
4100
580
92 (198)
6.7
23 450
5400
14 989 (3960)
7.0
5.3
_-__
59 932 (15 834)
..__
30 469 (67 173)
ACTUAL OPERATING TIME
Hrs/Day
24
24
10
Not measured - portable steam boiler in use.
-------
TABLE A-12. WARRICK PILOT PLANT DATA - THIRD SERIES OF TESTS (SEPTEMBER 3 TO OCTOBER 3, 1975)
Flow Rates
Air to Column - m3/min (SCFM)
Column Feed - L/min (gpm)
Feed Tap-Off to Settling
Tank - L/min (gpm)
Temperatures - °C (°F)
Ambient
Raw CCL Waste
Air to Column
Column Feed
Column Slowdown
Vapors - Column Bottom
Column Condensate
Overhead Vapor
Overhead Condensate
Steam Condensate
Water Out Heat Exchanger
Pressures - kPa (in. H20)
Air to Column
Demister Loop-Bottom
Demister Loop- Top
Overhead Vapor
Steam to Column
Feed Pump-Discharge - kPa (psig)
Production
Total Condensate - L/d (gpd)
Process Slowdown - L/d (gpd)
Waste Treated - L/d (gpd)
Steam Used - kg/d (Lbs/Day)
9/3
14 (500)
409 (108)
11 ( 3)
...
61 (142)
53 (127)
80 (176)
94 (201)
94 (202)
97 (206)
87 (189)
49 (120)
102 (216)
74 (166)
8.2 (33.0)
2.0 ( 8.0)
1.1 ( 4.5)
0.5 ( 2.0)
10.5 (42.0)
434 (63.0)
51 306 (13 555)
3 785 ( 1 000)
53 652 (14 175)
25 395 (55 987)
9/8
21 (750)
394 (104)
11 ( 3)
24 (75)
60 (140)
53 (127)
81 (177)
92 (198)
93 (199)
90 (194)
83 (181)
48 (119)
101 (214)
74 (166)
7.6 (30.5)
2.5 (10.0)
0.1 ( 4.0)
0.9 ( 3.5)
2.4 ( 9.5)
427 (62.0)
51 711 (13 662)
20 000 ( 5 284)
71 711 (18 946)
25 644 (56 536)
9/9
26 (912)
379 (100)
n ( 3)
— -* —
63 (145)
49 (121)
78 (172)
92 (198)
94 (201)
94 (202)
86 (186)
53 (128)
103 (217)
71 (160)
12.2 (49.0)
4.1 (16.5)
3.7 (14.8)
1.5 ( 6.0)
12.7 (51.0)
441 (64.0)
59 720 (15 778)
7 112 ( 1 879)
66 858 (17 664)
34 550 (76 170)
9/10
26 (933)
379 (100)
11 ( 3)
23 (74)
62 (143)
51 (123)
80 (176)
93 (200)
94 (201)
94 (202)
83 (181)
59 (139)
104 (219)
71 (159)
13.4 (54.0)
5.4 (21.5)
5.2 (20.8)
2.1 ( 8.4)
14.0 (56.2)
431 (62.5)
64 489 (17 038)
6 317 ( 1 669)
70 806 (18 707)
35 517 (78 302)
(continued)
-------
TABLE A-12.(continued)
9/11
9/17
9/18
9/19
en
ro
Flow Rates
Air to Column - m /min (SCFM)
Column Feed - L/min (gpm)
Feed Tap-Off to Settling
Tank - L/min (gpm)
Temperatures - °C (°F)
Ambient
Raw CCL Waste
Air to Column
Column Feed
Column Slowdown
Vapors - Column Bottom
Column Co~ndensate
Overhead Vapor
Overhead Condensate
Steam Condensate
Water Out Heat Exchanger
Pressures - kPa (in. H20)
Air to Column
Denvister Loop-Bottom
Demister Loop-Top
Overhead Vapor
Steam to Column
Feed Pump-Discharge - kPa (psig)
Production
Total Condensate - L/d (gpd)
Process Slowdown-L/d (god)
Waste Treated - L/d (gpd)
Steam Used - kg/d (Lbs/Day)
26
379
11
925
100
3
21
47
49
81 (177
69)
116)
120)
91
92
93
196
197
200
83 (182)
57 (135)
104 (219)
69 (156)
14.8 (59.5)
5.8 (23.4)
5.6 22.7
2.2 9.0
15.5 62.3
434 (63.0
64 243 (16 973)
9 584 ( 2 532)
73 826 (19 505)
41 657 (91 838)
24
397
11
851
105
3
47 (134)
48 (118)
80 (176)
92 (198)
93 (200
92 (197
84 184
53 (128
106 (222
68 (154
14.7
5.0
4.6
1.9
20.0
431
(59.0)
20.2)
18.3)
7.7)
(80.3)
(62.5)
60 428 (15 965
16 033 ( 4 236
76 461 (20 201
36 132 (79 658
24 (864
397 (105
11 ( 3
22
61
47
76
91
96
71 1
142)
ne;
168
196
205
91 (195)
83 (181]
46 (115;
102 215)
56 (132)
11.9 (48.0
4.3
3.9
1.6
15.2
431
17.2
15.7
6.6
60.9
62.5
52 778 (13 944)
16 003 ( 4 228)
68 781 (18 172)
30 764 (67 824)
25 (867)
397 (105)
11 ( 3)
20
61
49
68)
142)
120)
73 (163)
90 194)
91 (195)
88
78
42
103
191)
172)
107)
217)
51 (124)
12.4
3.3
2.8
1.4
11.3
434
(50.0)
(13.4)
11.3)
( 5.5)
(45.5)
(63.0)
47 074 (12 437
13 577 ( 3 587
60 651 (16 024
24 755 (54 576
(continued)
-------
TABLE A-12. (continued)
9/22
9/23
9/24
9/25
tn
CO
Flow Rates
Air to Column - m3/min (SCFM)
Column Feed - L/min (gpm)
Feed Tap-Off to Settling
Tank - L/min (gpm)
o o
Temperatures - C ( F)
Ambient
Raw CCL Waste
Air to Column
Column Feed
Column Slowdown
Vapors - Column Bottom
Column Condensate
Overhead Vapor
Overhead Condensate
Steam Condensate
Water Out Heat Exchanger
Pressures - kPa (in. H20)
Air to Column
Demister Loop-Bottom
Demister Loop-Top
Overhead Vapor
Steam to Column
Feed Pump-Discharge - kPa (psig)
Production
24 (850)
397 (105)
11 ( 3)
12 ( 54)
39 (103)
41 (105)
82 (180)
92 (198)
93 (199)
90 (194)
84 (183)
46 (114)
102 (215)
48 (118)
13.7 (55.0)
>8.7 (>35.0)
1.7 ( 3.0)
1.6 ( 6.5)
(48.5)
(62.5)
12.1
431
Total Condensate - L/d (gpd)
Process Slowdown - L/d (gpd)
Waste Treated - L/d (gpd)
Steam Used - kg/d (Lbs/Day)
58 433 (15 438)
25 390 ( 6 708)
83 815 (22 144)
26 751 (58 976)
24 (860)
397 (105)
11 ( 3)
12 ( 54)
56 (133)
40 (104)
83 (182)
91 (196)
93 (199)
90 (194)
83 (182)
46 (115)
102 (216)
35 ( 95)
14.2 (57.0)
>8.7 (>35.0)
3.0 (12.0)
1.9 ( 7.7)
11.0 (44.3)
438 (63.5)
57 823 (15 277)
9 175 ( 2 424)
66 998 (17 701)
28 674 (63 215)
24 (863)
397 (105)
11 ( 3)
12 ( 53)
60 (140)
37 ( 99)
84 (183)
91 (195)
92 (197)
90 (194)
83 (181)
46 (114)
102 (216)
13.9 (56.0)
>8.7 (>35.0)
4.9 (19.8)
2.0 ( 8.0)
10.4 (41.6)
438 (63.5)
55 579 (14 684)
5 129 ( 1 355)
60 708 (16 039)
27 205 (59 976)
24 (834)
397 (105)
11 ( 3)
11 ( 51)
58 (137)
37 ( 99)
85 (185)
92 (197)
93 (199)
92 (198)
85 (185)
48 (118)
101 (213)
14.2
>8.7
5.7
2.0
7.6
(57.0)
(>35.0)
(23.0)
( 8.2)
(30.5)
438 (63.5)
62 169 (16 452)
16 529 ( 4 367)
78 698 (20 792)
30 578 (67 413)
(continued)
-------
TABU A-12. (continued)
en
Flow Rates
Air to Column - mVin (SCFM)
Column Feed - L/min (gpm)
Feed Tap-Off to Settling
Tank - L/min (gpm)
Temperatures - C (°F)
Ambient
Raw CCL Waste
Air to Column
Column Feed
Column Slowdown
Vapors - Column Bottom
Column Condensate
Overhead Vapor
Overhead Condensate
Steam Condensate
Water Out Heat Exchanger
Pressures - kPa (in. HpO)
Air to Column
Demister Loop-Bottom
Demister Loop-Top
Overhead Vapor
Steam to Column
Feed Pump-Discharge - kPa (psig)
Production
Total Condensate - L/d (gpd)
Process Slowdown - L/d (gpd)
Waste Treated - L/d (gpd)
Steam Used - kg/d (Lbs/Day)
9/30
25 (866)
397 105)
11 ( 3)
20 ( 68)
56 (132)
48 (118)
85 185)
92 198)
93 199)
91 (195)
85 (185)
56 (132)
101 (213)
—
13.7 (55.0)
>8.7 (>35.0)
2.1 ( 8.5)
—
431 (62.5)
61 476 (16 242)
17 589 ( 4 647)
79 065 (20 889)
27 839 (61 375)
10/1
25 (867)
397 (105)
11 ( 3)
13 ( 56)
57 (134)
41 (105)
86 186)
92 198)
93 199)
92 (198)
85 (185)
51 (124)
101 (213)
—
14.4 (58.0)
—
2.1 ( 8.5)
—
438 (63.5)
63 755 (16 844)
12 926 ( 3 415)
76 680 (20 259)
31 376 (69 172)
10/2
25 (870)
397 (105)
11 ( 3)
9 ( 49)
51 (123)
37 ( 98)
85 (185)
92 (198)
93 (200)
92 (197)
84 (184)
47 (117)
101 (214)
_._
14.7 (59.0)
5.2 (21.0)
4.7 (19.0)
2.0 ( 8.0)
—
438 (63.5)
62 403 (16 487)
11 934 ( 3 153)
74 337 (19 640)
30 650 (67 573)
10/3
25 (875)
397 (105)
0 ( 0)
6 ( 43)
52 (125)
37 98)
85 (185)
92 (198)
93 200)
92 198)
84 184)
44 112)
102 215)
...
14.9 (60.0)
5.2 (21.0)
4.2 (17.0)
2.1 ( 8.5)
5.6 (22.5)
438 (63.5)
59 932 (15 834)
14 989 ( 3 960)
74 920 (19 794)
30 468 (67 170)
-------
TABLE A-13. RAW WASTE AND FEED MAKE-UP ANALYSES - THIRD SERIES OF TESTS (SEPTEMBER 3 TO OCTOBER 3, 1975)
en
in
RAW WASTE
r^j... Suspended Solids
Date
9/9A
9/9B
9/1 OA
9/10B
9/11
9/1 7A
9/1 7B
9/18
9/19
9/23
9/9A
9/9B
9/1 OA
9/10B
9/11
9/1 7A
9/1 7B
9/18
9/19
9/23
10/2
10/3A
10/3B
PH
9.9
10.0
10.1
10.2
10.0
10.0
10.1
9.7
10.6
10.1
6.4
6.4
6.6
7.5
9.6
6.8
6.9
4.5
7.0
6.0
4.1
5.8
6.5
tivity
(us)
2 100
2 525
3 500
4 700
2 600
2 008
3 075
1 115
6 400
4 480
3 380
3 300
2 100
4 600
2 150
5 120
5 210
3 020
12 600
6 100
5 800
3 900
5 200
at 105°C
(mg/L)
120
20
54
39
33
53
41
52
74
54
49
30
34
42
43
163
452
408
109
164
74
58
98
at 500°C
(mg/L)
30
2
19
21
13
10
18
10
39
13
FEED
16
6
12
22
14
21
63
284
46
29
21
4
9
Dissolved Solids
at 105°C
(mg/L)
2 500
2 700
4 300
6 000
2 800
3 200
3 600
1 100
8 700
5 700
MAKE-UP
4 200
3 900
2 600
5 900
2 400
8 200
9 300
3 200
18 000
5 300
7 500
4 200
5 500
at 500°C
(mg/L)
2 100
2 300
3 500
5 100
2 300
2 500
2 900
860
7 300
4 800
3 500
3 300
2 100
5 000
2 000
6 700
6 400
2 600
14 800
4 700
5 900
3 500
4 700
Oil
(mg/L)
242
70
155
143
74
177
173
90
228
228
150
101
121
150
68
319
561
83
539
169
239
166
194
Phosphorous as P0a
Total
(mg/L)
1 100
1 200
1 700
3 600
1 100
1 800
9 900
500
9 600
3 300
1 800
1 200
1 100
1 200
3 400
3 800
709
10 400
3 500
2 900
8 500
950
Dissolved
(mq/L)
600
1 100
1 600
2 100
800
1 800
9 200
450
9 600
3 100
1 500
1 100
360
1 000
3 100
3 400
68
9-300
3 500
2 900
550
610
-------
TABLE A-14. COLUMN AND OVERHEAD CONDENSATE ANALYSES - THIRD SERIES OF TESTS (SEPTEMBER 3 TO OCTOBER 3, 1975)
i
COLUMN CONDENSATE
r««j..x. Suspended Solids
Date
9/9A
9/9B
9/1 OA
9/1 OB
9/11
9/17
9/23*
9/25
10/1
10/2
_PJL
6.9
7.2
7.0
7.2
7.9
7.6
5.8
5.1
5.4
6.1
VVHUUV*
tivity
(US)
93.9
157.0
140.0
299.0
220.0
244.0
11.9
5.0
7.3
9.8
at 105°C
(mg/L)
0 '
0
0
10
129
0
0
1
2
7
at 500°C
(mg/L)
0
0
0
7
123
0
0
0
0
1
Dissolved Solids
at 105°C
(mg/L)
80
148
124
292
248
50
24
0
10
22
at 500°C
(mg/L)
62
108
90
244
198
10
0
0
10
0
Oil
(mg/L)
13
12
7
15
8
8
7
29
13
6
Phosphorous as P0a
Total
(mg/L)
60.0
58.0
80.0
111.0
97.0
6.4
5.7
4.5
1.3
1.8
Dissolved
(mg/L)
58.0
48.0
40.0
101.2
90.0
6.4
5.7
0.5
1.2
1.5
CD
OVERHEAD CONDENSATE
9/9A 5.4 5.8 00 16 2 50 2.3 1.6
9/9B 6.0 12.3 00 10 0 17 2.0 2.0
9/10A 5.3 6.5 00 0 0 41 0.8 0.8
9/10B 6.0 4.5 21 20 10 10 0.6 0.5
9/11 5.8 3.7 52 22 22 17 0.6 0.6
9/17 5.8 7.8 00 26 0 11 1.3 1.3
9/23 5.3 6.1 00 28 16 26 1.4 1.4
9/24 5.4 15.1 00 38 36 46 7.7 2.8
9/25 5.3 7.6 30 28 28 11 2.5 1.6
10/1 5.5 16.5 51 14 10 44 1.2 1.1
10/2 5.2 4.3 30 182 0 25 0,6 0.5
*Demister replaced in Thermopure column.
-------
TABLE A-15. PROCESS SLOWDOWN ANALYSES - THIRD SERIES OF TESTS (SEPTEMBER 3 TO OCTOBER 3, 1975)
Date
9/9A
9/9B
9/1 OA
9/10B
9/11
9/1 7A
9/1 7B
9/18
9/1 9A
9/19B
9/23A
9/24
9/25
10/1
10/2 A
10/2B
10/3A
10/3B
_EH_
6.5
6.4
6.5
6.4
7.1
7.1
8.1
7.0
7.5
8.7
6.4
6.1
6.1
6.8
6.3
6.5
7.0
6.6
Con due™
tivity
(uS)
15 000
18 900
21 000
21 500
16 000
13 500
13 800
17 500
21 750
20 400
21 400
20 750
23 400
24 500
23 250
23 500
17 500
20 500
Suspended Solids
at 105°C
(mg/L)
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
4 271
*
*
*
*
*
at 500°C
(mg/L)
* .
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
3 521
it
*
*
*
*
Dissolved Solids
at 105°C
(mg/L)
25 600*
34 000*
42 400*
38 100*
24 900*
29 500*
42 500*
23 400*
36 800*
39 500*
40 800*
43 300*
23 800
37 000*
43 800*
40 000*
29 200*
38 800*
at 500°C
(mg/L)
21 700*
29 400*
36 300*
32 600*
20 800*
24 500*
34 000*
19 500*
30 900*
33 500*
33 700*
36 100*
19 900
30 100*
35 900*
34 400*
24 700*
32 200*
Oil
(mg/L)
577
532
317
280
300
864
2 127
1 019
5 596
498
491
807
501
502
39
108
669
1 109
Phosphorous as P0a
Total
(mg/L)
11 600
8 000
13 200
15 500
12 900
13 100
13 700
5 100
8 700
5 600
16 200
17 600
14 300
15 300
18 200
16 900
17 600
25 100
Dissolved
(mg/L)
8 000
7 800
4 800
10 900
9 700
8 900
7 400
4 700
2 700
5 600
14 700
16 100
12 000
14 200
15 800
6 400
5 200
5 600
*Sample could not be filtered - reported as total solids.
-------
TABLE A-16. COMBINED COLUMN AND OVERHEAD CONDENSATE ANALYSES - THIRD SERIES OF TESTS (SEPTEMBER 3 TO OCTOBER 3, 1975)
r«-j..^ Suspended Solids
Date
9/1 7A
9/1 7B
9/18
9/1 9A
9/1 9B
9/23A
9/23B
9/24
10/2
10/3A
10/3B
_Pl_
6.9
4.9
5.7
4.2
5.7
6.0
—
5.3
5.6
5.8
6.0
WWIIUUV*
tivity
(uS)
90.0
28.8
8.9
29.0
5.2
10.7
—
7.7
6.0
6.9
15.3
at 105°C
(mg/L)
0
0
10
0
7
0
—
0
10
10
21
at 500°C
(mg/L)
0
0
4
0
3
0
—
0
5
0
0
Dissolved Solids
at 105°C
(mg/L)
36
46
8
24
0
10
—
20
38
40
66
at 500°C
(mg/L)
24
14
0
12
0
10
—
8
4
0
0
Oil
(mg/L)
10
25
23
8
10
—
29
—
—
19
30
Phosphorous as POa
Total
(mg/L)
3.0
2.4
1.9
1.1
0.7
4.3
—
0.5
2.5
0.8
0.6
Dissolved
(mg/L)
3.0
2.4
1.9
1.1
0.4
4.3
—
0.1
2.5
0.3
0.2
-------
TABLE A-17. COMBINED CONDENSATE ANALYSES AFTER OIL SEPARATION AND AFTER ACTIVATED CARBON
ADSORPTION - THIRD SERIES OF TESTS (SEPTEMBER 3 TO OCTOBER 3, 1975)
AFTER MECHANICAL OIL SEPARATOR
Date
9/1 7A
9/1 7B
9/18
9/1 9A
9/1 9B
9/23A
9/23B
9/24
9/25
10/2A
10/2B
10/3A
10/3B
PH
5.9
9.1
5.9
5.9
6.2
5.9
—
5.1
5.6
5.6
5.7
5.9
5.8
Con due-
tivity
(uS)
40.2
42.5
6.3
5.4
15.9
6.8
—
10.2
5.7
6.6
5.2
5.7
8.3
Suspended
at 105°C
(mg/L)
5
2
11
10
7
4
—
0
6
11
8
8
16
Solids
Dissolved Solids
at 500°C at 105°C
(mg/L)
0
1
6
4
0
0
—
0
3
0
2
0
0
AFTER ACTIVATED
9/1 7A
9/17B
9/18
9/1 9A
9/19B
9/23A
9/23B
9/24
9/25
10/2A
10/2B
10/3A
10/3B
5.7
4.5
6.5
6.0
8.6
6.4
—
6.1
6.1
6.2
6.2
6.0
6.3
68.8
38.3
5.8
7.6
33.8
6.7
—
7.5
30.7
5.5
4.5
7.3
8.2
0
0
10
9
0
0
—
0
2
2
7
7
23
0
0
7
0
0
0
—
0
1
0
3
0
0
(mg/L)
28
48
38
2
24
12
—
18
10
30
18
32
22
CARBON
20
48
16
52
52
20
—
14
0
0
20
18
76
at 500°C
(mg/L)
10
18
14
0
10
12
—
18
10
0
0
0
0
TREATMENT
10
14
2
2
14
8
—
14
0
0
0
0
18
Oil
(mg/L)
7
22
18
7
7
—
22
25
13
5
—
14
22
1
9
11
6
6
—
13
23
11
13
—
8
9
Phosphorous
as P0a
Total Dissolved
(mg/L)
1.6
1.8
1.9
1.0
1.7
2.2
—
2.5
1.0
1.1
1.0
1.3
1.9
0.8
4.3
0.5
1.0
0.4
0.4
—
0.9
0.6
0.6
0.5
1.1
2.8
(mq/L)
1.6
1.8
1.5
1.0
1.7
2.2
—
2.3
1.0
0.9
0.9
1.3
1.9
0.8
4.3
0.1
0.2
0.4
0.4
—
0.9
0.5
0.5
0.5
1.1
2.8
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please reail Instructions on the reverse before completing)
REPORT NO.
EPA-600/2-78-119
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION-NO.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
EVAPORATIVE PROCESS FOR TREATMENT OF
PHOSPHATE CONTAINING EFFLUENT
5. REPORT DATE
June 1978
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHOR(S)
D. G. Reininga
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
9. PERFORMING ORG'\NIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Aluminum Company of America
Alcoa Application Engineering Division
Alcoa Center, Pennsylvania 15069
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
1BB610
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
S-803261
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory
Office of Research and Development
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Fi nal Report
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
EPA/600/12
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
16. ABSTRACT
A unique evaporation/humidification process for treating wastewater effluent has been
developed at Alcoa Laboratories. A major portion of the effluent is recovered as
water of high purity suitable for recycle or reuse, and the small volume of concen-
trated chemicals can be either recycled or easily disposed of. The process operates
at low temperatures and near-atmospheric pressures. Low pressure steam generated
from waste heat is sufficient to operate it. A 75,000 L/day pilot plant was install-
ed at Alcoa's Warrick- County, Indiana, plant to demonstrate the performance and
reliability of the process for treatment of dilute, phosphate-containing effluent.
The installation was placed in service in January 1975, and operated on a non-
continuous basis until October 1975. During this time various problems were solved
and optimum operating conditions were established.. The average effluent treatment
rate was 71,200 L/day and excellent quality water was obtained. The system operated
satisfactorily when effluent and steam were available. Tests at Alcoa Laboratories
showed that the product condensate can be used as rinse water at the phosphate
cleaning lines in place of deionized water, and the concentrated phosphate blowdown
can be recycled as make-up to the phosphate cleaning.solution.
17.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
a.
DESCRIPTORS
b.lDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
:. COSATI Held/Group
Evaporation*
Materials recovery*
Operating costs
Evaporative column*, Waste
heat, Wastewater, Waste
treatment, Warrick plant,
Phosphate-containing
effluent*, Product
condensate water*,
Phosphate concentrate*.
68D
13. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Release to public
19. SECURITY CLASS (This Report)
Unclassified
1. NO. Ol
66
20. SECURITY CLASS (Thispage/
Unclassified
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
60
•{( US. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 19^8—767-140/1309
------- |