ALASKAN INDUSTRY EXPERIENCE IN ARCTIC SEWAGE TREATMENT ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY WATER QUALITY OFFICE NORTHWEST REGION ALASKA WATER LABORATORY College, Alaska ------- ALASKAN INDUSTRY EXPERIENCE IN ARCTIC SEWAGE TREATMENT by Sidney E. Clark- Amos J. Alter 0. W. Scribner H. J. Coutts C. D. Christianson W. T. McFall Presented at 26th Purdue Industrial Waste Conference Purdue Un-i.v"ersity Lafayette, Indiana May 1971 Alaska Water Laboratory Environmental Protection Agency and Alaska Department of Health and Welfare State of Alaska Fairbanks, Alaska ------- A Working Paper presents results of investigations which are to some extent limited or incomplete. Therefore, conclusions or recommendations—expressed or implied—are tentative. ------- TABLE OF CONTENTS Page- INTRODUCTION 1 SYSTEMS DESCRIPTION 4 WASTE CHARACTERIZATION 12 DISCUSSION OF SYSTEMS PERFORMANCE 17 CONCLUSIONS 20 SELECTED REFERENCES 25 ii ------- LIST OF FIGURES Pa^e Figure 1 Base Camp at Prudhoe Bay 2 Figure 2 Pipeline Road Construction Camp 2 Figure 3 Oil Exploration Camp 2 Figure 4 Alaska Pipeline Route 5 Fi gure 5 Aerial View of Pipeline Road Construction Camp 7 Figure 6 Physical-Chemical Treatment Plant at Pipeline Road Construction Camp 7 Figure 7 Physical-Chemical Treatment Plant 8 Fi gure 8 Surge Tank and Positive Displacement Pumps at Base Camp Sewage Treatment System 9 Figure 9 Extended Aeration System at Base Camp 9 Figure 10 Pasteurization-Incineration Modular System at Drill Camp 9 Fi gure 11 Interior of Pasteurization-Incineration System; Surge Tank and Sewage Metering Pump 11 Figure 12 Piping to Incinerator at Pasteurization- Incineration System 11 Figure 13 Permafrost and Pipeline Failure 13 Figure 14 Aerated Lagoon at Work Camp 13 Fi gure 15 Extended Package Plant at Drill Site 14 Figure 16 Base Camp Water Supply Flexible Line 14 Figure 17 Compressor House for Aerated Lagoon at Work Camp 14 iii ------- LIST OF TABLES Page Table 1 North Slope and Arctic Sector Pipeline Waste Water Treatment Facilities, March 1971 6 Table 2- North Slope Raw Sewage Characteristics 15 Table 3 Domestic Waste Disposal Methods 17 Table 4 North Slope Sewage Treatment Plant Effluent Characteristics 19 Table 5 Camp Water Usage 21 Table 6 Household Sewage Distribution 21 Table 7 Water Conservation Systems 23 iv ------- ALASKAN INDUSTRY EXPERIENCE IN ARCTIC SEWAGE TREATMENT INTRODUCTION Alaska is America's last frontier and is a very large state. In fact, Alaska is as large as Texas, California, and Montana collectively with 586,400 square miles. Alaska has two-thirds of the United States' coastline or 33,904 miles of coastline and 40 percent of America's fresh water (1). The North Slope of the Brooks Range lying at the southern edge of Arctic Alaska, is a very harsh region having freezing conditions approximately 260 days of the year, and receives approximately five inches of precipitation each year. Lenses of dirty ice exist throughout the soil cover and mean annual ground temperatures at depths of 20 to 30 feet are near 15°F or lower (2). The environment of Alaska's North Slope is hostile to water supply and waste disposal practices common to southern Alaska, North and South Dakota, Montana, Wyoming, and Minnesota. Camps on the North Slope must be thought of as isolated life support systems and therefore all of the aspects of public health must be con- sidered for their impact, one on the others. Sewage disposal, solid waste disposal, and water supply are all parts of the same North Slope life support system, and solutions must be provided in a manner that prevents disease while simultaneously minimizing adverse effects on the environment. Several types of camps are utilized and Figures 1, 2, and 3 show three types. It should be obvious that solutions to utility problems will be different at each type of site. The discovery of oil on Alaska's Arctic slope caused a tremendous scramble to define the extent of the find. Oil companies and their subcontractors soon found that Alaska intended to practice multiple use concepts in land management, thus requiring them to provide secondary waste treatment and, in many cases, complete treatment. The North Slope companies' systems range from simple stabilization ponds to tertiary treatment. While all of the operations are unique by the nature of their North Slope location, two physical-chemical systems are of special interest. These advanced waste treatment systems are treating raw sewage from two mobile camps and are the only advanced waste treatment systems operating in the Arctic. A unique split system has recently been placed in operation at one drilling site. The system has an incinerator as its central core with all of the waste water except toilet flush water heat treated and chlorinated. The toilet flush water is burned in the incinerator. A variety of extended aeration package plants are in operation including facilities with long detention facultative polishing lagoons. 1 ------- Figure 1 Base Camp at Prudhoe Bay Figure 2 Pipeline Road Construction Camp Figure 3 Oil Exploration Camp ------- Conservation of water and approaches for possible partial reuse become very interesting when one considers, the cost of potable water. Estimates of $0.04 to $1.00 per gallon are common, depending upon site and availa- bility of water. Considering a drilling site of 50 men wh^re domestic water costs $0.40 per gallon (exclusive of treatment), toilet flushing water alone will cost $500 per day (1,250 gal/day) or $60,000 for a 120 day drilling operation (3). In December 1.969, th'ere was only one operating plant (4), an aerated lagoon; however, in March 1971, there were 17 operating^ plants, an indication of the industry attitude once the ground-rules are defined. 3 ------- SYSTEMS DESCRIPTION A quick look at the location map of the North Slope and Arctic pipeline route, Figure 4, indicates the industry response to needs and require- ments for adequate sewage treatment facilities for their construction, drilling, and base camps. There are still several cases where open disposal pits are being relied upon, but most of the permanent or semi- permanent camps have" attempted to comply with State and Federal require- ments. Several types of systems are represented, including physical- chemical, pasteurization-incineration, complete mix extended aeration, rated aeration, oxidation ditch extended aeration, and aerated lagoon. Table 1 tabulates plant type, size, location, fabrication, capacity, and discharge point. Several of the extended aeration plants are followed by long detention lagoons, with the longest detention system being capable of storing the complete annual flow of the camp it serves at design capacity. An example of effluent lagooning from extended aeration is shown in Figure 5, North Slope Pipeline Construction Camp. The lagoon appears alongside and to the right of stacks of culverts. The physical-chemical plants incorporate alum flocculation, upflow clarification, first stage downflow carbon adsorption-filtration, second stage upflow carbon adsorption, and clilorination with effluent storage for future reuse for toilet flushing. The physical-chemical plants are compact with the holding tanks taking up more space than the treatment units as illustrated in Figure 6, Physical-Chemical Waste Treatment. Figure 7 gives a better view of the plant. Note the use of a traveling belt paper filter for waste sludge conditioning. With the exception of the oxidation ditches and the aerated lagoon, all systems are housed innheated structures. One of the more sophisticated extended aeration layouts is shown in Figures 8 and 9. Note the use of polyurethane insulation. The North Slope sewage treatment plants because they are housed and heated are not really subjected to Arctic climatic problems, except humidity and air handling related to the associated housing that must be overcome. The oxidation ditches are split culverts exposed to the environment. A very unique system, utilizing the pasteurization-incineration principles with the sewage split into "sewage" (toilet wastes) and "Waste" (Kitchen, laundry, and shower effluents) flows has been placed in operation at a drill site. The "sewage" is fed into a surge tank and metered into the incinerator burner. The burner system is currently being converted to an atomized approach. Primary clarification will be accomplished with a 100 micron vibratory screen. The metering pump and surge tank are 4 ------- Barrow Pruddhoe Bay & Teshekpuk 6 BR O O K S RANGE (p ALASKA KEY MAP \ Figure 4 ALASKA PIPELINE ROUTE ------- TABLE 1 NORTH SLOPE AND ARCTIC SECTOR PIPELINE WASTE Activity Location Type Mfr. Construction Pipeline Toolik A Phys-Chem I Aluminum Oil Field Deadhorse B Phys- -Chem I Aluminum Oil Field Mikkelson C Incineration II Steel Oil Field Deadhorse D Ext. Aer. III Steel Pipe!ine Galbraith E Ext. Aer. III Steel Pipe!ine Happy Valley F Ext. Aer. III Steel Oil Field Kuparuk G Ext. Aer. III Steel Oil Field Deadhorse H Ext. Aer. III Steel Oil Field Deadhorse I Ext. Aer. IV Steel Pipe!ine Chandalar J Ext. Aer. IV Steel Oil Field Deadhorse K Ext. Aer. IV Steel Oil Field Prudhoe L Ext. Aer. V Steel Pipeline Prospect M Ext. Aer. VI Pipe Pipe!ine Coldfoot' N Ext. Aer. VI Pipe Pipeline Dietrich 0 Ext. Aer. VI Pipe Pipe!ine 5-Mile Camp P Rated Aer. VII Steel Pipeline Crazyhorse Q Aer. Lagoon VIII Permafrost Oilfield Deadhorse Pit Permafrost Oilfield Deadhorse Pit Permafrost TREATMENT FACILITIES, MARCH 1971 Unit Design Effluent Capac. GPP Pischarge Pop. Chlor. 24,000 Lined lagoon 340 yes 24,000 Lined lagoon 75 yes 5,000 Tundra pond 50 yes 2,500 Tundra pond 50 yes 19,000 Lagoon 320 yes 24,000 Sagavani rktok 220 yes 6,000 Kuparuk 60 yes 5,000 Tundra 50 yes 7,000 Tundra pond . 50 yes 7,000 Chandalar 92 yes 8,333 Tundra pond 75 yes 15,000 Tundra pond 200 yes 18,000 Jim River 250 yes 15,000 Koyukuk 190 yes 15,000 Dietrich 190 yes 15,000 Surface 208 yes 15,000 Sagavani rktok 160 yes Tundra no Tundra no ------- Figure 5 Aerial View of Pipeline Road Construction Camp limit' .(• minimum,, Figure 6 Physical-Chemical Treatment Plant at Pipeline Road Construction Camp ------- Figure 7 Physical-Chemical Treatment Plant ------- Figure 8 Surge Tank and Positive Displacement Pumps at Base Camp Sewage Treatment System Figure 9 Extended Aeration System at Base Camp Figure 10 Pasteurization-Incineration Modular System at Drill Camp ------- shown in Figure 11, and tl\e Metered flow goes into the incinerator through the uninsulated pipe shown in Figure 12. The total pasteuri- zation-incineration module .shown in Figure 10 also houses water treatment and storage. The "waste" waters are collected in the rectangular tank alongside the "sewage" surge tank shov/n in Figure 11, and are fed through a heat exchanger in the incinerator, with rate flow controlled by a thermostatically actuated valve. 10 ------- Figure 12 Piping to Incinerator at Pasteurization-Incineration System ------- WASTE CHARACTER!ZATION The mode of life in North Slope camps varies from camp to camp according to the size of camp and the type of operation that it services; however, a basic trend exists. Camp life revolves around shift work with 10 or 12 hours per day shifts being dominant. Smaller camps will have sewage peak loads that are many times the average load. Larger camps, partic- ularly those having central laundry facilities, including laundry service to satelite camps, will have a more evenly distributed load. Like any institutional sewage flow, North Slope camp flow tends to show very high peaks due to required activities. Industry camps in remote locations have a hi story,of providing excellent food in quantity and the men have a tendency to eat more. The Arctic places much greater demands on men. Therefore, one must assume that more BOD and COD per man finds its way into the waste streams. This, in fact, seems to be the case as is borne out in Table 2, North Slope Raw Sewage Characteristics. Sewage flows will vary from 30 gallons per capita per day to 130 gallons per capita per day depending upon the availability of water and weather conditions. When water is not severely short, due to weather conditions, trail conditions or mechanical fail- ures, men of the North Slope camps use lots of water for warm-up showers, regardless of the cost of water per gallon. Figures 13, Permafrost and Pipeline Failure, and 14, Aerated Lagoon, show the impact of heated sev/age water on permafrost and demonstrate the results. The water from a sewer failure has created a large depression, indicating that the line was located over ice rich permafrost. Note the obvious embankment sloughing associated with the aerated lagoon. The aerated lagoon has a mild turbulance that assists in undermining the unstable ice rich permafrost that it is located in. The relatively warm aerated lagoon provides a heat source to promote thawing of underlying zones. These pictures should indicate the reasons for excluding lagoons from ice-rich permafrost areas. Arctic facultative lagoons are nothing more than storage lagoons, and are therefore eliminated for that reason. If allowed, what about future public health? Figure 15 shows a preferable means of providing sewage treatment while protecting the permafrost. Figure 15 also illustrates why sewage treatment is ex- tremely expensive on the North Slope. Building utilidors and insulating and heating the isolated plant and individual sewerlines is very costly in terms of construction materials and maintenance and operating labor. Figure 16 shows a successful means for providing flexibility and environ- mental protection for pressure lines. The one shown happens to be a water line but the same approach is feasible for pressure sewer lines. The use of wood structures to protect equipment appears to present an unnecessary fire hazard, particularly if equipment is in a small space such as shown in Figure 17. 12 ------- Figure 13 Permafrost and Pipeline Failure Figure 14 Aerated Lagoon at Work Camp ------- Figure 15 Extended Package Plant at Drill Site Figure 16 Base Camp Water Supply Flexible Line Figure 17 Compressor House for Aerated Lagoon at Work Camp ------- TABLE 2 NORTH SLOPE RAW SEWAGE CHARACTERISTICS Location Date Population BOD COD JS SS A 7/16/70* 12 484 842 894 387 8/20/70* 12 380 2440 2790 330 9/30/70* 9 - 1605 1298 228 3/17/71* 7 - 7610 - - 3/22/71* 7 - 3260 - - B 8/20/70* 10 740 2000 2024 816 9/16/70* 6 - 842 - 811 C (All wastes except toi- let) 4/13/71** 50 . 550 _ C (Toilet wastes) 4/21/71 50 - 4601 - - E 7/16/70* 15 500-1100 3600 3316 2788 9/30/70* 10 - 232 582 256 L 8/20/70* 85 7330 2510 3154 1547 (Average of 7 75 600 1150 - 1500 days of composites in March 1971)** *Grab samples from mixed surge tanks **Composite samples taken with composite sampler on basis of frequency but not flow matching 1 Sampled by others 15 ------- The extended aeration plant at site D serves a drilling operation and is, therefore, subjected to start-up conditions several times per year and variations in flow. During the past winter, start-up was slow and a biological mass had not developed after three months of operation. The reasons for this slow start-up are not clear, but probably can be attributed to hydraulic overloading, as well as a normal lag period. 16 ------- DISCUSSION OF SYSTEMS PERFORMANCE Placing- sewage treatment systems in operation on the North Slope of Alaska is not an easy task. Yet, several companies within less' than one year responded to State requirements (Alaska, Environmental Health Practices) in an admirable way as can be seen by comparison of Table 1, North Slope and Arctic Sector Pi peline Waste Treatment Facilities, March 1971, and Table 3, Domestic Waste Disposal Methods, December 1969. Several different types of sewage treatment plants found their way to the North Slope and a discussion of their performance is worth while. TABLE 3 Domestic Waste Disposal Methods* Man-made ponds: Direct to ponds From recirculating toilets From septic pit Number used Remarks 28 3 1 32 One aerated Burial methods: Outhouses Dry collection (barrels, bags and chemical toilets) Recirculating toilets (effluent buried) 4 1 One on tundra, with no pit Package plant _1_ Not oper- 1 able yet, being in- stalled 42** ^Reference 4 **0ne geophysical camp used lagoons for wastes from chemical toilets plus an outhouse. 17 ------- The effluent quality on specific dates for a number of the plants is listed in Table 4. As cair be-seen from Table 4, the plant effluents still have a considerable load of.BOD,.COD, and suspended solids. Assigning usual removal percentages is not an easy task with these plants, as the basic strengths of raw waste needs better definition. When looking at Table 2, what do you use for raw B0D--330, or 1100, or an average of 590? For raw C0D--232 or 7610, or an average of 2085? Al- though the results are not indicative, the physical-chemical plants produced very clear effluents. Visual examination of samples showed a much clearer effluent from them than from the biological plants. One of the two physical-chemical plants was utilized by Kreissl for studies con- ducted at Cincinnati and his results are reported in a paper presented at the Cold Regions Engineering Symposium, August 17-19, 1970 (5). In that report, he stated that the mean effluent COD for the unit was 13.5 mg/1, and the total hydrolyzable phosphorus in the final effluent was equal to less than 0.1 mg/1 as P during 50 percent of the runs. Kreissl, et al., states, "It is significant to note that the effluent color levels were below the U. S. Public Health Service Drinking Water Standards, maximum of 15 units during 90 percent of the runs. A recent recommend - tion for a toilet flushing standard of 30 units of color was never exceeded during the testing period. The turbidity of the product water was below one 0. U. during most of the runs. In terms of requirements, the product quality was below the USPHS standards for drinking water, 5 J. U. during approximately 85 percent of the test runs and below the suggested limit for toilet flushing water, 20 J. U. 100 percent of the time." While the physical-chemical plants outperformed biological plants, one must ask why they did not perform as well as the one unit did when tested in Cincinnati. Several potential reasons exist: (1) The raw wastes are stronger; (2) The raw water chemical make-up is significantly different; (3) The plants operated at less than 10 percent of design capacity and, therefore, were not operated for long periods of time; (4) Untrained operators; and (5) Infrequent carbon backwash and allowing the pin floe to accelerate the carbon aging. The contractor has noted that the belt paper filter utilizes an excessive amount of paper, thus, creating an extremely expensive operation when the raw sewage is pre-filtered through it. When paper filtering was only applied to the sludge dewatering, the paper utilization decreased tremendously, but sedimentation problems were created with the flat bottom feed surge tank, because the solids origi- nally taken out of the raw sewage by the paper filter were now going into the tank to settle out. The biological treatment plant at Site E is operated by the camp manager because he has taken a special interest in the system. He has augmented the feed with kitchen scraps and fish wastes to increase the organic feed concentration, thus compensating for the fact that the camp has run at less than 10 percent of capacity most of the time. Table 4 shows the results of this conscientious operator when compared to other extended aeration plants. However, this is the exception, not the rule. The authors have observed that biological plants placed in operation to serve drill sites really are not much more than primary settling basins for the first two months. ------- TABLE 4 NORTH SLOPE SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT EFFLUENT CHARACTERISTICS System Date BOD COD SS A 7/16/70 78 160 69 8/20/70 46 221 111 9/16/70 - 318 16 9/30/70 - 309 11 3/17/71 - 373 25 B 8/20/70 329 435 61 D 9/16/70 - 696 291 E 7/16/70 33 — 68 9/01/70 28 - 15 9/30/70 - 113 28 F 9/30/70 0 324 147 L 7/30/70 180 364 34 (1) 10 49 10 8/20/70 153 371 106 (1) 15 106 22 9/16/70 - 1167 1049 (D - 357 388 3/12/71 40 170 68 Q 9/16/70 - 268 148 (1) Sample at end of.long detention lagoon 19 ------- CONCLUSIONS The first major conclusion that one should draw is that the oil industry responded in a major way to the need for adequate sewage treatment in Arctic Alaska and did so in a relatively short period of time. Camp water usage varies widely, depending upon the camp. If water becomes extremely short because of weather or other conditions, the water usage will drop to approximately 30 grams per capita day (gpcd) as a direct result of curtailment of shower and laundry activity. These drops in water use are unplanned and create extremely uncomfortable conditions for the men. If a camp operator has the means for providing an adequate water supply, a usage rate greater than 50 gpcd should be expected. The cost of providing water does not bother North Slope workers; it's just one of management's problems. Table 5 lists water usages as reported by North Slope operators. North Slope sewage strength is going to be greater than suburban temperate region sewage, with BOD strengths of 400 to 800 mg/1 and COD strengths of 1000 to 1600 to be expected. As was pointed out in the paragraph above, the flows are not dramatically less. Biological plants can operate on the North Slope and provide a high level of BOD and solids removal, in fact, several systems are operated effi- ciently. Just like extended aeration plants elsewhere, many of the well protected plants of the North Slope do not receive the qualified operator . attention that is necessary to assure continuously high levels of removal; consequently, they do not provide the levels of treatment expected of them in terms of BOD and COD removal but this may be due in part to the strength of influent sewage. All of the operators have designed their extended aeration plants to rely on a "lagoon" to trap the "waste" solids instead of providing intentional sludge wasting and disposal. Biological plants do not require a supply of chemicals; therefore, operating costs should be less than for physical-chemical plants. The first costs of equipment and on-site preparation are not greatly different for physical- chemical and biological systems, except when a long detention lagoon is required behind an extended aeration system. In the latter case, the first cost of an extended aeration lagoon system can go out of sight when compared to a physical-chemical, treatment system. Extended aeration systems that are set up to serve drill sites or other types of camps that are going to be on location for 120 days or less do not actually reach optimum operating conditions before the job is one-half to two-thirds completed, and in some cases, completed. The effluent from an extended aeration system that is not operating efficiently and is turbid will not be properly disinfected. If high levels of secondary treatment are required at a drill site, and no special, extended aeration system start- up procedures are followed, the first 6 to 10 weeks are nothing more than an "unintentional" white-wash job. 20 ------- TABLE 5 CAMP WATER USAGE (3) Camp Gallons Per Capita Per Day A 100 to 120 C 32 to 80 D 70 to 100 E 50 to 100 F 50 L 100 to 120 Average = 83.8 TABLE 6 HOUSEHOLD SEWAGE DISTRIBUTION [After Bailey, et al. (6)] Waste Source Volume of Waste (gpcd) Total Flow 30 40 50 75 100 Kitchen 0 7 10 10 15 Toilet 15 15 20 25 30 Showers, wash basins 15 18 20 25 35 Laundry 0 0 0 15 20 21 ------- The physical-chemical plants- did a reasonable job and provided a clear effluent most of the time. Like some of the biological plants, these plants were designed to handle much larger waste loads than were actually handled during the past year. The plants did not perform as expected, or as one of them had under prior tests. The probable reasons for the efficiency reduction are several, including long periods of shut-down between periods of use, infrequent activated carbon backwashing, and untrained operators. The physical-chemical plant does not require a start-up period and,-therefore, produces a quality effluent that can be effectively disinfected immediately after camp start-up; not 6 to 10 weeks later. At the end.of an.operation, the physical-chemical plant can be drained, the sludge dewatered and burned, and the activated carbon removed and burned. Actually, all the sewage treatment plants on the North Slope are trans- plants and in fact, misfits. North Slope camps are isolated life support systems. Newly designed camps are desperately needed that treat the whole camp and all of its functions as an integrated system, thus recog- nizing the interdependence of human comfort, group hygiene, basic services provision, water supply, sewage treatment, solid waste manage- ment, and air pollution control. Preconceived notions that particular types of equipment, plumbing, etc., are unacceptable because they are unconventional or because they are considered to be a luxury, should not be allowed to bias the new design. Oh yes, the old standard excuse provides an easy out - "Plumbing codes will stop any changes, after all, they can never be changed." However, its amazing how new approaches can become acceptable if they are proven superior and do not threaten any block of jobs within the jurisdiction involved. Starting with the interrelationship of water supply, water use fixtures, human comfort and architecture use, requirements can be reduced dramat- ically. Let's look at some examples. Tables 5 and 6 give temperate climate household water usage figures and North Slope water usage figures. Table 7 shows an analysis of estimated water supply savings based on utilization of available hardware that actually would provide a more comfortable camp. If the changes were pushed only to the limits of available "conventional11 hardware and techniques, the savings in water use could be 41 gallons per person per day or approximately 2050 gallons per day for a 50 man'camp. If the water has a true value of 35 cents per gallon, as one operator has estimated, the .2050 gallon savings turns into $717.50 per day or $71,750 for a TOO day operation. Going along with some "unconventional" approaches, the usage of water can be re- duced approximately 55 gallons per man per day without sacrificing any comfort or convenience. That additional 14 gallons per man per day would represent a total of 700 gallons per day for the 50 man camp example or $245 per day and $24,500 for the 100 day operation. The un- conventional elements of the system1 consist of either utilizing vacuum flush systems such as have been utilized in Europe for many years, or utilization of treated shower water as a flushing water for conventional 22 ------- TABLE 7 WATER CONSERVATION SYSTEMS (useage in gallons per capita per day) Unconventional Conventional Systems Systems System 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Kitchen* 7.00 6.75 6.75 6.75 6.75 6.75 6.75 6.75 6.75 Laundry* 8.75 8.75 8.75 8.75 8.75 4.50 4.50 4.50 4.50 Utility* 1.25 1.25 1 .25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1,25 1.25 Bath** 40.00 40.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 15.00 Lavatory* 2.25 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Toilet* 25.00 25.00 25.00 17.50 13.50 13.50 2.50 0 0 TOTAL 84.25 83.75 73.75 66.25 62.25 58.00 47.00 44.50 29.50 Water Savings Over 1 0.50 10.00 18.00 22.00 26.25 37.25 39.75 54.75 System Description System. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1. Conventional Plumbing X X X X X X X X X 2. Replace Faucets w/Aerator Faucets X X X X X X X X 3. Replace Shower Heads w/Flow Control Heads X X X X X X X 4. Replace Water Closet w/Shallow Trap Closet X 5. Replace Water Closet w/Flush Valve Toilets and Urinals X X 6. Replace Top Load Washers w/Front Load Machines X X X X 7. Replace Water Closet w/Vacuum Flush System X X X 8. Add Physical-Chemical Treatment of Shower Water and Recycle for Toilet Flush X X 9. Add Sauna for Warm-up Instead of Shower Warm- ¦up X *Figures from Bailey (6) **Figures adjusted to reflect North Slope averages ------- toilets. Use of a vacuum sewage transmission system opens up new avenues of physical-chemical sewage treatment with a dual collection system pro- viding for separation of the strong and weak streams. Handling sewage solids should be considered in conjunction with solid waste management, and incineration is presently the preferred means for disposal. The example presented above has been offered to demonstrate how economics, occupant comfort, and environmental quality control may be combined. 24 ------- SELECTED REFERENCES 1. Anonymous, The Alaska Plan, A Statement of Economic and Ecological Purpose, Alaska Department of Economic Development, Pouch EE, Juneau, Alaska 99801. 2. Alter, Amos J., Sidney E. Clark, E. K. Day, J. M. Cohen, and James F. Kriessl, "Arctic Waste Management," presented at the 25th Purdue Industrial Hastes Conference, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana, May 1970. 3. Conversations and interviews with North Slope operators. 4. Scribner, Jonathan W., Elroy K. Day, Warren T. McFall, and Leroy Reid, "Report of Survey, The Influence of Oil Exploration and Development on Environmental Health and Quality on the Alaskan North Slope," Alaska Department of Health and Welfare, Federal Water Pollution Control Administration, Arctic Health Research Center, December 1969. 5. Kreissl, J. F., S. E. Clark, J. M. Cohen, and A. J. A1ter,"Advanced Waste Treatment and Alaska's North Slope," presented at Cold Regions Engineering Symposium, 21st Alaska Science Conference, University of Alaska, College, Alaska, August 17-19, 1970. 6. Bailey, James R., Richard J. Benoit, John L. Dodson, James M. Robb, and Harold Wallman. "A Study of Flow Reduction and Treatment of Waste Water from Households," Contract No. 14-12-428 between the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration and General Dynamics, Electric Boat Division, U. S. Department of the Interior, Federal Water Pollution Control Administration, Cincinnati, Ohio. 25 ------- |