|
| |  Posted 10/20/2007 6:13:36 PM | |
| Forum Member
 
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 11/1/2007 1:40:20 PM
Posts: 26, Visits: 34 |
| | I'd add on a "recirculating sand filter" using quarter inch gravel - give the system more surface area for the nitrfiers to attach themselves and they will. Regulators are interesting. Isnt the MDL for ammonia either 0.1 or 0.5 depending on what method you choose? I'd ask them what Std Method Test they require to measure compliance with 0.06 ppm. I dont think a wetland is the answer - organisms will attach themselves to plant roots, nitrify the ammonia and the plant will use the NOs as a source of N for plant tissue and then die and rot from organic N to ammonia and ........ How can one "control" the process if one isnt the master of the N cycle in this case. I have heard of ammonia this low in some pristine streams but I also hear the M word associated with these situations.
and the bug knows best |
| |
| | | Posted 10/21/2007 3:39:02 PM | |
| Supreme Being
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 6/26/2008 4:01:08 PM
Posts: 156, Visits: 1,477 |
| | Re-reading some of this post, now that it has come back up, I see one item that can be clarified. The limit for unionized ammonia is pretty low, but the proportion of ammonia in the ionized or unionized states depends upon the pH and temperature. You may find that the standard being applied to the effluent actually represents a total ammonia that, while tight, is very achievable. Around here, we have a number of STPs that successfully meet total ammonia limits in the 1.2 - 2.4 range. The 5.0 should be do-able. The 1.0 sounds a lot tougher, but not impossible. I'm still waiting to see it demonstrated that the reed bed systems will consistantly meet those type of limits in winter. |
| |
|
|