Skip to main content

MINIMIZING WASTEWATER LOAD AND SLUDGE PRODUCTION AT A CHEMICAL MANUFACTURING FACILITY

Buy Article:

$17.50 plus tax (Refund Policy)

Or sign up for a free trial

Abstract:

Eastman Chemical Company operates a large chemical manufacturing facility in Kingsport, Tennessee. In 1995 the BOD5 load to the wastewater treatment plant averaged 233,000 lb/day, well above the plant's design capacity of 200,000 lb/day. In addition, sludge production averaged 513 tons/day and periodically exceeded the site's disposal capacity. This resulted in an excess of sludge in the aeration basins and clarifiers and imposed significant constraints on process control. An engineering study estimated that a 25 percent capacity expansion of the treatment plant would require a capital investment of 60 million. Provisions for adequate sludge disposal were estimated to cost an additional 40 million.

The company launched an aggressive effort to drive at-source waste minimization. The waste minimization initiative consisted of two major elements: 1) a comprehensive waste load assessment program and 2) a cross-functional problem-solving team. The waste load assessment program was put in place to better quantify the organic load coming from each of the manufacturing areas. This information was used to identify where the greatest opportunities were and to track improvements as minimization projects were implemented. The crossfunctional team developed plans and projects for reducing organic load. Projects were selected that had the highest waste reduction potential per dollar spent. Concurrent with the waste minimization initiative, wastewater treatment personnel began to investigate process control techniques that could potentially reduce the sludge production rate. This included a modified sludge wasting strategy and dewatering process improvements.

The success of the program was evident within one year of its initiation and gains have been realized every year since. From 1995 to 2000, organic load to the wastewater treatment plant dropped by over 21% and sludge production was down by 34% — all of this during a time when manufacturing production was up by 10%. Not only was costly expansion of the wastewater treatment and sludge disposal facilities deferred; annual operating expenditures for the treatment facility were reduced by almost 6,000,000.

Document Type: Research Article

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.2175/193864701785019344

Publication date: January 1, 2001

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
  • ingentaconnect is not responsible for the content or availability of external websites
wef/wefproc/2001/00002001/00000003/art00020
dcterms_title,dcterms_description,pub_keyword
6
5
20
40
5

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
X
Cookie Policy
ingentaconnect 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