Skip to main content


The full text article is not available for purchase.

The publisher only permits individual articles to be downloaded by subscribers.

or click here to sign up for a free trial


The Sacramento Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant (SRWTP) recently evaluated several alternatives to address long-term biosolids dewatering, drying, and handling and disposal issues. SRWTP decided to evaluate air quality emissions and impacts including permitting requirements, criteria pollutants, greenhouse gases, hazardous air pollutants (HAPS), controlled emissions, and air emissions from hauling trucks and secondary sources that are related to biosolids treatment (e.g., boilers or furnaces for heat drying, fugitive emissions from storage tanks, etc.). This paper provides a full picture of total air quality impacts from biosolids treatment and direct insights into any air quality permitting concerns under current Sacramento Metro Air Quality Management District (SMAQMD) and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) air quality laws and regulations.

Air emission totals for each biosolids treatment alternative included air emissions from secondary sources, controlled sources, and truck hauling. Air emissions from the following biosolids treatment alternatives were evaluated:

Centrifuge dewatering emissions

Plate and frame press dewatering emissions

Indirect drying emissions – including dewatering and secondary emissions

Direct drying emissions – including dewatering and secondary emissions

Controlled emissions – odor control, impingement plate scrubber, regenerative thermal oxidizer (RTO)

Trucking emissions for each alternative

All air emissions from the biosolids treatment alternatives and their associated regulatory impacts were insignificant. No problems were predicted in attaining air district permits or significantly impacting the environment. Emissions from dewatering with no drying, were much lower than any of the drying alternatives (with trucking emissions included). The overall emissions for the combined dewatering, drying, and trucking alternatives presented minimal environmental impacts and should therefore readily receive permits. It should be noted, however, that other non-air quality factors such as odors, cost effectiveness, reliability, and ease of operation may have a strong influence on which alternative is selected.

Document Type: Research Article


Publication date: January 1, 2000

More about this publication?
  • Proceedings of the Water Environment Federation is an archive of papers published in the proceedings of the annual Water Environment Federation® Technical Exhibition and Conference (WEFTEC® ) and specialty conferences held since the year 2000. These proceedings are not peer reviewed.

    WEF Members: Sign in (right panel) with your IngentaConnect user name and password to receive complimentary access.
  • Subscribe to this Title
  • Membership Information
  • About WEF Proceedings
  • WEFTEC Conference Information
  • Ingenta Connect is not responsible for the content or availability of external websites

Access Key

Free Content
Free content
New Content
New content
Open Access Content
Open access content
Subscribed Content
Subscribed content
Free Trial Content
Free trial content
Cookie Policy
Cookie Policy
Ingenta Connect website makes use of cookies so as to keep track of data that you have filled in. I am Happy with this Find out more