Water Company Goes Solar

Utilizing off the shelf technology -

WSSC turns to solar power to cut sewage- treatment electricity costs

By Katherine Shaver, Published: December 21

On a recent gray December morning, nearly 8,500 solar panels covering 13 acres in Germantown tilted toward the sky, straining to harness any glimmer of sunlight.
Their host: a sewage-treatment plant in Montgomery County, one of the first in the Washington region to try solar power. The panels, also installed at a Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission facility in Upper Marlboro, began operating in October.
Solar panels are expected to provide up to one-fifth of the two plants’ electrical needs at rates 25 percent cheaper than traditional electricity, WSSC officials said. (And, yes, if it’s a cloudy day or the middle of the night, your toilet will still flush.)
“For a utility, it’s a huge milestone, because very few have solar power,” said Rob Taylor, the WSSC’s energy manager. “If we can show we can buy alternative energy cheaper than conventional energy, it’s a win-win situation.”
The idea is catching on with water and sewer utilities across the country, in part because they guzzle electricity. Operating round-the-clock, the facilities run enormous pumps to deliver drinking water and then use huge blowers, centrifuges and other equipment to treat sewage and return the disinfected water to local rivers. Those energy costs can fluctuate dramatically, putting pressure on operating budgets, utility officials say.
“We’re a massive energy user, and we pay a pretty penny for it,” said George S. Hawkins, DC Water’s general manager.
Sewage-treatment plants, in particular, are being looked at for solar power because vast parcels of land bought decades ago as buffers for nearby communities can accommodate acres of the panels. Meanwhile, the panels’ prices have dropped significantly in recent years, helping utilities achieve bigger savings.
Utility officials say they also are exploring ways to reduce their dependence on the electrical grid during and after severe storms, when power outages can wreak havoc on sewer systems and cause overflows into streams.
It’s also about saving money. DC Water, the largest consumer of electricity in the District, is installing equipment similar to a giant pressure cooker at its Blue Plains Advanced Wastewater Treatment Plant in Southwest Washington. The equipment will “cook” and sterilize the brown, goopy sludge collected from treated sewage and turn it into food for methane-generating bacteria. The methane gas will then be burned to power steam turbines that produce electricity, officials said.
DC Water officials said they expect the system to save the utility $10 million in electricity costs — and another $10 million in trucking costs because half as much sludge will need to be hauled away. The utility also is exploring selling the sterilized sludge as fertilizer, Hawkins said.
The annual savings are expected to more than cover the debt service on the $470 million borrowed for the project, Hawkins said. That will free up money needed to repair and replace aging infrastructure, such as underground pipes that burst after too much decay, he said.
Hawkins, the former head of the District’s Department of the Environment, said the new process also is expected to cut the treatment plant’s greenhouse gas emissions by one-third. “We’re very aware of the fact that a lot of the energy we’re using is coming from big Midwestern coal plants with quite a big environmental footprint,” Hawkins said.
Blue Plains has less open land available for solar panels than some other treatment plants, he said. Still, DC Water is considering putting panels on underground settling tanks and other structures on the 150-acre campus.
Howard County officials began looking at alternative energy sources last year, after Hurricane Sandy knocked out power to the Little Patuxent Water Reclamation Plant in Savage. The outage caused 19 million gallons of diluted but untreated sewage to flow into Little Patuxent River, officials said.
The county is installing three diesel-powered generators to provide backup power, along with a solar panel system to offset the diesel emissions and provide alternative power.
The solar panels are projected to save about $22,800 in annual electricity costs and offset the generators’ carbon dioxide emissions by 150 percent, Howard officials said.
“If we’re going to be able to expand our solar capacity, we have to creatively look at publicly owned infrastructure that has capacity” for solar equipment, Howard County Executive Ken Ulman (D) said. “Especially in urban areas, treatment plants are a big part of the solution.”
In Northern Virginia, Fairfax Water officials recently determined that it would take too long — 36 years — for the annual electricity savings to cover the costs of installing solar panels at a large drinking-water filtration plant, said Shawn O’Neill, the utility’s manager of energy programs.
However, he said Fairfax Water is considering solar-powered security cameras, outdoor lights and office building heating. O’Neill said solar power would be especially useful to automate remote valves that now must be operated manually in areas with no electricity.
The WSSC solar program is a public-private partnership. Washington Gas Energy Systems paid the $12 million to install the solar panels and will operate them for 20 years. The WSSC pays only for the solar power it uses. WSSC officials say they expect to save $3.5 million total in electricity costs over the 20 years and cut the two plants’ annual carbon dioxide emissions by 3,200 metric tons — described as the equivalent of taking 665 cars off the road.
Scott Wiater, president of Rockville-based Standard Solar, which installed the WSSC solar panels and will maintain them, said utilities are focused on those savings.
“They’re doing it for the bottom line. That’s the primary driver,” Wiater said. “The feel-good environmental aspects are just gravy for them.”


http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/trafficandcommuting/wssc-turns-to-solar-power-to-cut-sewage--treatment-electricity-costs/2013/12/21/84d3db8c-6801-11e3-ae56-22de072140a2_story.html?hpid=z7

Home Bio-Digesters For Cooking Gas Production

   Among my primary interests is local energy production and local reuse of organic "waste" - the leftover by-products of our lives - food preparation and landscaping and gardening to name two large contributors to what we call our "garbage".
   Large centralized trash-to-energy plants are built on a model that imitates the status quo - central plant, collection system for raw material that is reliant on truck pick-up/delivery and a distribution method by wire, pipe, truck or rail. As a management system for both "trash" pick-up and energy production, centralized systems require a large amount of energy use, with resulting pollution, for moving things around.
    Centralized energy production also is an incredibly efficient system for the redistribution of wealth. Basically, the purchase of energy never stops - we all need it.Yet it is a product that vanishes at the moment we acquire it - yes we get something, lets say cooked food, that is essential to our well being, but in a few hours, or the next morning we will need more. 
    Imagine instead a system that does not require the purchase of energy because the energy is now locally produced by the user themselves utilizing what they have previously thrown away - things that previously they had to pay to have taken away! A variety of savings appear - both to the individual user and to the larger society. Most immediately for the user is a reduction or elimination of  paying for energy. Further, if energy production is brought to the house or building level, the means of energy production - solar collector or bio-gas generator for example - increase the value of the building they are attached to. Now instead of paying out for energy, money is saved and the value of most people's biggest asset - their house - increases.
    Following is a story from The Banaglore Mirror (India) about one family and their bio-digester -

SELF HELP IS BEST HELP

Nine gas cylinders a year rule does not apply to him

By Niranjan Kaggere

Posted On Monday, July 29, 2013

It’s a problem that has generated more than a whiff of unpleasantness. While most of us ranted and suffered as the garbage kept piling up right outside our doorstep, with contractors refusing to carry out door-to-door collection, a Banashankari resident did what a true civic-minded citizen would have done.

To begin with, he complained to the BBMP commissioner. But after three complaints went unheeded, Satish Bakshi decided not to waste any more time and do it himself. And he came up trumps! Bakshi’s efforts have paid off and today, he and his family savour the sweet smell of success as their indigenously made bio-gas plant lights the kitchen fire thrice a week, and also keeps their vegetable and fruit garden verdant and bountiful.

Bakshi says he watched the garbage assume menacing proportions with every passing day, and it finally struck him that he could extract gas out of it. With the internet as his teaching aid, and a plastic water tank, a useless tyre and other ordinary devices to fuel his dream, he embarked on the project.

SURFING FOR IDEAS

An independent tax consultant, Bakshi tapped the internet for ideas. “I read that the concept of converting garbage into gas had caught on in Pune and Kochi. Since I was setting up my bio-gas plant in a residential area, I needed to avoid foul smell and ensure disposal of residue (slurry) within minimum space and with limited funds. The methods suggested on  line were for a full-fledged bio-gas plant which I couldn’t have set up. But taking a leaf out of those ideas, I thought of experimenting with a plastic water drum installed on my roof,” Bakshi told Bangalore Mirror.

Bakshi’s next step was to put the ubiquitous black water drum to ingenious use. He converted it into a digester tank to generate pure methane and installed a pipeline leading to his kitchen.

Bakshi says he had a plastic tank on the terrace of his house with a capacity of 1,000 litres. “I bought another similar tank of 750-litre capacity. After making a small partition inside the bigger tank to hold the garbage, I inverted the smaller tank upon it, covering the partition. To facilitate the insertion of garbage, a medium-sized opening was made at the centre of the inverted tank. A small hole was drilled on the periphery of the same tank and was fitted with a valve and pipeline to supply the methane gas produced,” he explained.

NEIGHBOURS GOT NO WHIFF

With a gas digester in place, Bakshi poured the garbage into it in the first week of April. Though their experiment had been flagged off, the entire family was on tenterhooks, plagued by fears of the foul smell causing a nuisance to neighbours, especially because it would be nearly 45-50 days before the gas could be produced since the garbage needs time to completely decompose before it can produce methane. “However, no one in the neighbourhood will believe it if I tell them that I have set up a gas digester atop my house. You will not be able to smell any stench unless you peep into the tank.”

He says once the gas is collected inside the inverted tank, it begins to rise — an indicator that it’s ready to be tapped. To tap gas, you need to apply pressure on top of the tank so that it pushes the gas through the pipeline. Once again, Bakshi’s innovations came into play. “To exert pressure, I used a waste tyre of my car and a small boulder. It worked, and I managed to easily pump the gas through the pipe,” he explained.

Their moment of glory could not have been better timed. On June 5, World Environment Day, Bakshi says they could smell methane in the tank. “On that day, I just turned on the valve and held a lighted matchstick to test if it would work. The first sight of the dark blue flame sparked off celebrations in our home,” says Bakshi, adding that very evening they prepared their coffee with the gas from their plant. Though the quantity was very low at first, it improved with every passing day. “Now, we get about two to three hours of constant supply thrice a week, depending on the amount of garbage,” he says.

EVEN THE RESIDUE COUNTS

The solid garbage put into the tank turns into a slurry residue after the extraction of gas. Bakshi has found good use of the residue too. An outlet flushes out the liquid that finds its way into his terrace garden. “I have been growing pineapple, mango, some vegetables, spinach and banana on the rooftop,” he says.

Though they don’t have enough garbage to generate gas on a daily basis, Bakshi says homes that produce 5-6 kg garbage every day can cook using bio-gas and cut down on LPG usage. However, since the gas doesn’t come at great pressure, the burners need to have bigger holes.

Sharing their experiences, Bakshi and his wife, K Aravindavalli, caution against putting seeds of fruits like jackfruit or mango and chicken bones. “If the substance is hard, it will take several months to decompose. Anything that does not decompose will remain at the bottom and eat up space. So, irrespective of the waste, cut it into small pieces, give it a rinse with water and pour into the tank,” Aravindavalli says.

The entire set-up has cost the Bakshis less than Rs 20,000. “It could have been lesser, but since I was doing it on a trial-and-error method, I incurred some extra expenditure,” he says, adding that if BBMP or state government helps with subsidy, a bio-gas plant would be a viable alternative for every household.

A SECRET RECIPE

Thanks to his constant innovation and experimentation, Bakshi reveals he has concocted a mixture of certain organic products which he adds into the garbage tank for speedy fermentation. While he is keeping the recipe a closely guarded secret, he is willing to supply the powder at a nominal rate.

Meanwhile, garbage collection has resumed since last month, but the Bakshi household is no longer dependent on the system. Before starting the project in April, he had approached the BBMP, assuming he needed permission for the bio-gas plant. But he was told there was no such provision, and he could go ahead with it if it did not harm neighbours.

Copyright 2009 Bennett Coleman & Co. Ltd. . All rights reserved.

http://www.bangaloremirror.com/index.aspx?page=article&sectid=1&contentid=20130729201307290117459819d2ec7b6#ftr2 

Cell Phone Toxic Waste

Lot of toxic waste for our convenience - from The New York Times -

May 4, 2013

Where Do Old Cellphones Go to Die?

By LEYLA ACAROGLU

AMERICANS replace their cellphones every 22 months, junking some 150 million old phones in 2010 alone. Ever wondered what happens to all these old phones? The answer isn’t pretty.

In far-flung, mostly impoverished places like Agbogbloshie, Ghana; Delhi, India; and Guiyu, China, children pile e-waste into giant mountains and burn it so they can extract the metals — copper wires, gold and silver threads — inside, which they sell to recycling merchants for only a few dollars. In India, young boys smash computer batteries with mallets to recover cadmium, toxic flecks of which cover their hands and feet as they work. Women spend their days bent over baths of hot lead, “cooking” circuit boards so they can remove slivers of gold inside. Greenpeace, the Basel Action Network and others have posted YouTube videos of young children inhaling the smoke that rises from burned phone casings as they identify and separate different kinds of plastics for recyclers. It is hard to imagine that good health is a by-product of their unregulated industry.

Indeed, most scientists agree that exposure poses serious health risks, especially to pregnant women and children. The World Health Organization reports that even a low level of exposure to lead, cadmium and mercury (all of which can be found in old phones) can cause irreversible neurological damage and threaten the development of a child.

The growing toxic nightmare that is e-waste is not confined to third world outposts. It also poses health problems in the United States where, for several years, the Federal Bureau of Prisons has kept inmates busy processing e-waste. There are concrete steps the government, manufacturers and consumers could take to better dispose of electronic trash and to help prevent the pileup of more e-waste and the hazards e-waste processing poses.

The United States, for example, remains the only industrialized country that has not ratified the Basel Convention, an international treaty that makes it illegal to export or traffic in toxic e-waste. Fully implementing the treaty would be a step toward joining global efforts to contain toxic waste troubles.

The Responsible Electronics Recycling Act, introduced in Congress in 2011, would have made it illegal to export toxic waste from the United States to countries that don’t belong to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. The aim was to stop dumping e-waste on the world’s poorest nations and thus to provide an incentive for safer waste management in our own country. The bill had bipartisan support but was never put to a vote.

The European Union provides a model for industrial regulation that would shift the burden of safe product disposal back to the manufacturers that produce electronic goods. Its Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment Directive requires electronic sellers to accept, free of charge, any of their used products brought in by customers for recycling. The goal is to have properly recycled 85 percent of the European Union’s e-waste by 2019. Similarly, Japan requires its electronic manufacturers to establish their own recycling facilities or commission third parties to recycle a range of products, from computers and cellphones to TVs and air-conditioners.

Government or consumer pressure on manufacturers to design electronics with end-of-product-life issues in mind could be enormously helpful. Most cellphones, for example, are deliberately designed to make disassembly difficult. Changes in the way manufacturers glue, screw and solder components together would make it easier to dismantle discarded phones and thus reduce the risks posed by crude recycling techniques like those deployed by Ghanaian children.

THERE are alternative phone service business models that could be beneficial to producers, users and the rest of us. For example, manufacturers could sell products complete with prearranged recycling service or subscriptions that made it possible, for example, for phone user to exchange old units for new ones rather than throwing them away. Under a product service system model, companies recycle old units and repurpose core components. Xerox uses a similar model for its photocopiers, without impact on sales or profits.

In the absence of government regulation or industry initiative, consumers could play a role in determining what happens to products that have outlived their usefulness. Most phones and small electronics are designed with obsolescence in mind. But what if we held on to our gadgets longer and repaired, rather than replaced them? We could recycle the ones we no longer use through certified recycling services like e-Stewards, a nonprofit organization that runs certification programs for e-waste recyclers, ensuring that goods are not improperly exported.

As consumers we need to demand better end-of-life options for our high-tech trash; if manufacturers and government fall down on the job, we, the millions of Americans who own cellphones, should press for safe recycling.

Leyla Acaroglu is a sustainability strategist based in Melbourne, Australia.

This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:
Correction: May 12, 2013



http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/05/opinion/sunday/where-do-old-cellphones-go-to-die.html

Latex Paint Disposal

The DC Department of Public Works web site seems to be of two minds about latex paint (and it's can). First latex paint is listed as "Unacceptable household hazardous waste" and then under a section called "How You Can Help" we are told that latex paint is "not hazardous".

"Unacceptable household hazardous waste and e-cycling items include:

• Air conditioners (Call 311 for a bulk trash collection appointment.)
• Ammunition (Take to the closest police station.)
• Explosives (Take to the closest police station.)
• Latex paint (Dry out and place in the trash.)

How You Can Help

Latex paint is NOT HAZARDOUS. If you have unused latex paint, remove the lid and let it dry out. Then place the can in the trash. You can speed up the drying process by adding some kitty litter to the paint."


Not sure I want to cut through the semantic acrobats of the logic that allows both of those assertions to be true nor do I want to push the limits of recycling possibilities - I just want to get rid of the stuff in as safe a manner as I can given the circumstances...... and it is clear DPW wants me to dry the paint out and put it in the trash.....

So I dried out the paint and left the paint can in the trash container a couple of weeks ago. After the garbage crew came through, I found the paint can left behind next to the garbage can. Other garbage was gone but not the paint can. Hmmmmmm. Will try again.