Energy efficient dewatering technology reduces carbon footprint
Energy efficient dewatering technology may be the key to reducing your site’s carbon footprint
Knowing the carbon footprint of dewatering options is an important step in designing systems that provide sustainable environmental benefits. Finding an energy efficient dewatering technology leads to greenhouse gas reductions and significant cost savings. Many factors contribute to major differences in the size of a dewatering project’s carbon footprint. These can include variables such as manufacturing, transportation, installation, and operation.
Bishop Water can account for these variables using a carbon footprint calculator to compare the carbon emissions of dewatering systems and identify how a site’s carbon footprint can be reduced.
In 2009, a town in southeastern Ontario was exploring options to dewater process solids from its water treatment plant (WTP). Using a carbon footprint calculator, Bishop Water determined its passive, gravity-driven solids management solution requires about 72% less electricity compared to a belt press.
Dewatering 144 cubic metres (188 cubic yards) of sludge over a 1.5-hour period with this technology only requires about 84 kW. Comparatively, a belt press would need to use approximately 300 kW to dewater the same amount of sludge over a five hour period.
The town ultimately selected Bishop Water’s low-energy solids management solution to provide onsite dewatering. The technology eliminates energy-intensive mechanical dewatering equipment and produces high quality filtrate. The filtrate also meets regulatory requirements for direct release to a receiving body without any additional treatment.
Which breakwater solution has a lower carbon footprint? Geotube® containers or a rock breakwater structure?
Bishop Water also compared the difference between using rocks or Geotube® containers for a breakwater structure. The situation considers a 930-metre-(3,051-foot-) long, 1.8-metre-(6-foot-) high breakwater structure to protect a section of Lake Ontario shoreline.
To create a rock breakwater, a convoy of trucks would have to transport 13,600 tonnes of rock from a quarry that is about 160 km (99 miles) away. Comparatively, a breakwater structure made of Geotube® containers would contain 10,000 cubic metres (13,080 cubic yards) of sand. This sand is from the lake at the construction site in most cases. This approach dramatically reduces truck traffic and could also reduce the time required and cost to complete the project.
A carbon footprint calculator considers all of the factors to determine the carbon footprints. The conclusion shows that the Geotube® breakwater project would emit 2,649 fewer tonnes of carbon since it uses locally dredged sand.
Learn more about how Bishop Water’s solids management solution helped reduce a water treatment plant’s carbon footprint.
Contact us to discuss how Bishop Water can reduce the carbon footprint of your site.
Sign up for our e-newsletter.