The production of vermicompost from dairy sludge and its value as a plant growth medium

Dairy sludge generated at Glanbia Ingredients Ltd., Kilkenny has up until now been landspread. This study investigated the feasibility of using earthworms to vermicompost the sludge as an alternative method of treatment. It was found that high levels of ammonia in the sludge led to earthworm fatality but that by manually aerating the sludge the ammonia could be volatilised or by adding zeolite the ammonia could be absorbed, thus solving the problem. In a medium scale trial, the earthworm species Dendrobaena veneta and Eisenia fetida dominated the polyculture. Earthworms grew and generated cocoons during vermicomposting. During vermicomposting no leachate was generated. Nutrient changes took place during vermicomposting. There were high levels of nitrate, increased calcium and sulphate in the vermicomposted dairy sludge. The amount of magnesium, potassium and chloride did not change, while phosphate was undetectable after vermicomposting. The levels of nitrate and phosphate were good indicators of the extent of vermicomposting. The vermicomposted dairy sludge provided improved growth and yields of radishes and barley compared to the dairy sludge and control. Compared to the vermicompost, the dairy sludge provided heavier ryegrass yields and more marigolds with larger flower diameters. Generally, it is the amount of phosphate in dairy sludge that dictates how much can be applied as a fertiliser on land. Vermicomposting reduced the amount of phosphate to an undetectable level but on the other hand created a problem of high nitrate levels. In a pot trial with grass grown in vermicompost the nitrate leached from the vermicompost. In field conditions the leaching of nitrate might occur and could cause an increased risk of contamination of groundwater and watercourses.

A review of the development of regional sludge treatment centres and a baseline characterisation of Irish sewage sludges

This Study assessed the development of sludge treatment and reuse policy since the original 1993 National Sludge Strategy Report (Weston-FTA, 1993). A review of the 48 sludge treatment centres, current wastewater treatment systems and current or planned sludge treatment and reuse systems was carried out Sludges from all Regional Sludge Treatment Centres (areas) were characterised through analysis of selected parameters. There have been many changes to the original policy, as a result of boundary reviews, delays in developing sludge management plans, development in technology and changes in tendering policy, most notably a move to design-build-operate (DBO) projects. As a result, there are now 35 designated Hub Centres. Only 5 of the Hub Centres are producing Class A Biosolids. These are Ringsend, Killamey, Carlow, Navan and Osberstown. Ringsend is the only Hub Centre that is fully operational, treating sludge from surrounding regions by Thermal Drying. Killamey is producing Class A Biosolids using Autothermal Thermophilic Aerobic Digestion (ATAD) but is not, as yet, treating imported sludge. The remaining three plants are producing Class A Biosolids using Alkaline Stabilisation. Anaerobic Digestion with post pasteurisation is the most common form of sludge treatment, with 11 Hub Centres proposing to use it. One plant is using ATAD, two intend to use Alkaline Stabilisation, seven have selected Thermal Drying and three have selected Composting. While the remaining plants have not decided which sludge treatment to select, this is because of incomplete Sludge Management Plans and on DBO contracts. Analysis of sludges from the Hub Centres showed that all Irish sewage sludge is safe for agricultural reuse as defined by the Waste Management Regulations {Use of Sewage Sludge in Agriculture) (S.I. 267/2001), providing that a nutrient management plan is taken into consideration and that the soil limits of the 1998 (S.I. 148/1998) Waste Management Regulations are not exceeded.

The appraisal of mesophilic anaerobic digestion and thermophilic aerobic digestion in the treatment of municipal sludge in Ireland

It has been well documented that the optimum feedstock for anaerobic digesters consists of readily biodegradable compounds, as found in primary sludge or even a mixed substrate of primary and excess activated sludge. Due to the requirements of the Urban Wastewater Treatment Plant Directive of 1991, the quantities of secondary sludge generated is set to increase substantially. A pilot scale study was undertaken to evaluate the performance of both Mesophilic Anaerobic Digestion and Thermophilic Aerobic digestion in the treatment of secondary sludge. The results indicated that the anaerobic pilot scale digester achieved a greater solids destruction than the aerobic pilot plant averaging at 28% T.S. removal verses 20% for the aerobic digester, despite the fact that secondary sludge is the optimum feedstock for aerobic digestion. This can, however, be attributed to the greater biomass yield experienced with aerobic systems, and to the absence of Autothermal conditions. At present, the traditional technique of Mesophilic Anaerobic Digestion is in widespread application throughout Ireland, for the stabilisation of sewage sludge. There is only one Autothermal Thermophilic Aerobic Digester at present situated in Killarney, Co. Kerry. A further objectives of the study was to compare full-scale applications of Mesophilic Anaerobic Digestion to ATAD. Two Sludge Treatment plants, situated in Co. Kerry, were used for this purpose, and were assessed mainly under the following headings; process stability, solids reduction on average, the ATAD plant in Killarney has the advantage of producing a “Class A” Biosolid in terms of pathogen reduction, and can effectively treat double the quantity of sludge. In addition, economically the ATAD plant is cheaper to run, costing €190 / t.d.s verses €211 / t.d.s. for the anaerobic digester in Tralee. An overview of additional operational Anaerobic Digestion Plants throughout Ireland is also presented.

Energy from waste (EfW): a feasibility study on the economic and the environmental co-benefits of biogas production within rural communities

Energy from waste (E/W) technologies in the form o f biogas plants, CHP plants and other municipal solid waste (MSW) conversion technologies, have been gaining steady ground in the provision o f energy throughout Europe and the UK. Urban Waste Water Treatment Plants (UWWTP) are utilising much o f the same biochemical processes common to these E/W plants. Previous studies on Centralised Anaerobic Digestion (CAD) within Ireland found that the legislative and economic conditions were not conducive to such an operation on the grounds o f low energy price for electric and heat energy, and due to the restrictive nature o f the allowable feedstocks. Recent changes to the Irish REFIT tariff on energy produced from Anaerobic digestion; alterations to the regulation o f the allowable use o f animal by products(ABP); the recent enactment o f the Renewable Energy D irective (09/28/EC) and a subsequent review o f the draft Biowaste Directive (2001) required that the issue o f decentralised energy production in Ireland be reassessed. In this instance the feasibility study is based on a extant rural community, centred around the village o f Woodford Co Galway. The review found that the prevailing conditions were now such that it was technically and economically feasible for this biochemical process to provide energy and waste treatment facilities at the above location. The review also outlines the last item which is preventing this process from becoming achievable, specifically the lack o f a digestate regulation on land spreading which deals specifically with biowaste. The study finds that the implementation o f the draft EU biowaste regulations, with amendments for Cr and Hg levels to match the proposed Irish regulation for compost, would ensure that Ireland has some o f the most restrictive regulations in Europe for this application. The delay in completing this piece o f legislation is preventing national energy and waste issues from being resolved in a planned and stepwise fashion. A proposed lay out for the new Integrated Waste from Energy Plant (IW/EP) is presented. Budget economic projections and alternative revenue streams are outlined. Finally a review o f the national policies regarding the Rural Development Plan (RDP), the Rural Planning Guidelines (RPG) and the National Renewable Energy Action Plan (NREAP) are examined against the relevant EU directives.

An analysis of the use of photogrammetric sorting to audit construction and demolition waste production on site

This study analyses the area of construction and demolition waste (C & D W) auditing. The production of C&DW has grown year after year since the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) first published a report in 1996 which provided data for C&D W quantities for 1995 (EPA, 1996a). The most recent report produced by the EPA is based on data for 2005 (EPA, 2006). This report estimated that the quantity of C&DW produced for that period to be 14 931 486 tonnes. However, this is a ‘data update’ report containing an update on certain waste statistics so any total provided would not be a true reflection of the waste produced for that period. This illustrates that a more construction site-specific form of data is required. The Department of Building and Civil Engineering in the Galway-Mayo Institute of Technology have carried out two recent research projects (Grimes, 2005; Kelly, 2006) in this area, which have produced waste production indicators based on site-specific data. This involved the design and testing of an original auditing tool based on visual characterisation and the application of conversion factors. One of the main recommendations of these studies was to compare this visual characterisation approach with a photogrammetric sorting methodology. This study investigates the application of photogrammetric sorting on a residential construction site in the Galway region. A visual characterisation study is also carried out on the same project to compare the two methodologies and assess the practical application in a construction site environment. Data collected from the waste management contractor on site was also used to provide further evaluation. From this, a set of waste production indicators for new residential construction was produced: □ 50.8 kg/m2 for new residential construction using data provided by the visual characterisation method and the Landfill Levy conversion factors. □ 43 kg/m2 for new residential construction using data provided by the photogrammetric sorting method and the Landfill Levy conversion factors. □ 23.8 kg/m2 for new residential construction using data provided by Waste Management Contractor (WMC). The acquisition of the data from the waste management contractor was a key element for testing of the information produced by the visual characterisation and photogrammetric sorting methods. The actual weight provided by the waste management contractor shows a significant difference between the quantities provided.