Emerging Technologies

Wastewater Treatment and Process

Water Recycling Systems
ET18SCE7070

Prepared by: RMS Energy Consulting

Emerging Products
Customer Service
Southern California Edison

[August 2020]
Wastewater Treatment and Process Water Recycling Systems PPYYSCEETXXXX

Acknowledgements

Southern California Edison’s Emerging Products (EP) group is responsible for this project. It
was developed as part of Southern California Edison’s Emerging Technologies Program
under internal project number ET18SCE7070. RMS Energy Consulting, LLC conducted this
technology evaluation with overall guidance and management from David Rivers. For more
information on this project, contact [email protected].

Disclaimer

This report was prepared by Southern California Edison (SCE) and funded by California
utility customers under the auspices of the California Public Utilities Commission.
Reproduction or distribution of the whole or any part of the contents of this document
without the express written permission of SCE is prohibited. This work was performed with
reasonable care and in accordance with professional standards. However, neither SCE nor
any entity performing the work pursuant to SCE’s authority make any warranty or
representation, expressed or implied, with regard to this report, the merchantability or
fitness for a particular purpose of the results of the work, or any analyses, or conclusions
contained in this report. The results reflected in the work are generally representative of
operating conditions; however, the results in any other situation may vary depending upon
particular operating conditions.

Southern California Edison

Emerging Products August 2020
Wastewater Treatment and Process Water Recycling Systems PPYYSCEETXXXX

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The main objective from this study is implementing on-site wastewater ideas that can
reduce a sites total energy consumption, by eliminating or drastically reducing the need for
offsite wastewater facilities; thus, helping SCE meet California’s 2045 decarbonization goals,
by reducing the need for pumping. This study will be used to help pave a path towards
custom solutions for on-site wastewater treatment devices.
Currently, most end users send their wastewater to nearby offsite wastewater treatment
facilities, which can be costly as it requires transporting, pumping, and service fees. Some
dairy facilities use a lagoon, located on their property, to dilute their wastewater and irrigate
low-level crops.
These new technologies are designed to be an on-site wastewater treatment system that
can remove a majority of containments in the wastewater efficiently, allowing facilities to
expand their reuse of wastewater in other areas such as drip irrigation, drinking water,
facility maintenance, etc., by helping customers reduce their energy demand from pumping
extra amounts of water from a water table, as well as, help facilities reduce their water
demand and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
This white paper is being prepared with the intentions to help with future custom codes,
bringing technology awareness, and help drive on-site delivery. In this white paper, we are
determining the energy savings and demand reduction over incumbent technologies for
multiple devices that all focus on on-site wastewater.

WATER REUSE
New wastewater technologies can treat and reduce containments in the wastewater
on-site, allowing facilities to reuse the wastewater in other areas, such as, returning
to drip irrigation from flood. ENVIRO can reduce 99.9% of solids, 64% of Total
Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN), and over 90% of phosphorous and nitrates below the levels
mandated in the state of California, potentially eliminating the use of dairy lagoons
(WTG, 2019).The ClearCapture technology, marketed for Food & Beverage facilities,
can help these facilities to recover up to 80+% of its wastewater to be reused on-site
by removing approximately 90+% of solids and 40-60% of organics in the water.
Effluent from this system was tested at a cheese processing facility, where it was
determined to be safe for animal consumption (ClearCove, 2016). In addition,
BioFiltro’s BIDA system allows for on-farm recycling of water due to its ability to
remove 85% of the total suspended solids (TSS) and 80% of Nitrogen from dairy
wastewater. This major benefit allows facilities to increase the number of animals
allowed on a farm, switch from low to high level crops, change of land use, reduce
their water demand, and reduce the odor from manure (BioFiltro, 2019). Dairy and
other animal farms typically transfer their wastewater to a dairy lagoon, where it is
diluted with fresh, clean water from the water table in order to return to drip
irrigation. Using AST technology, the water savings is the amount of water needed
for dilution, helping facilities to take water directly from the flood and into the drip
irrigation. The CLARA system has a 67% removal rate of TSS, allowing farmers to
reuse their effluent for drip irrigation or in other areas within the facility.
Additionally, the CLARA system can reduce nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium
loading.

Southern California Edison Page i

Emerging Products August 2020
Wastewater Treatment and Process Water Recycling Systems PPYYSCEETXXXX

ENERGY SAVINGS
These wastewater technologies also contribute to reduce energy usage through more
efficient processing techniques and the avoided electricity use embedded in the
water saved through treatment. Embodied energy consists of all energy inputs into a
unit of water required for production, treatment, transport, and any other work that
would need to be done to bring the water to its final end use destination. A reduction
in water required on-site results in less water that must be imported from outside
sources, and pumping water is a significant contributor to embodied energy.
ENVIRO purports to use only approximately 25% of the energy of typical wastewater
treatment through its combination of processes that can be applied directly at the
point of use in a highly mobile and scalable fashion. ClearCove’s ClearCapture and
Harvester technology serve as more effective primary treatment systems to reduce
organics and waste to reduce the load and energy use for downstream secondary
treatment, leading to savings of up to 50% over traditional methods. As a secondary
benefit, the ClearCove technology increases the capture of methane and biogas
byproducts which can be used for on-site energy generation to further offset energy
usage. The technology EcoVolt, utilizes its supplemental on-site power generation,
while BioFiltro and AST significantly increase the proportion of on-site reusable water
to provide energy savings through a reduction in embodied energy.

CURRENT MARKET
California has been the nation’s primary leader in milk production, having 33% of
U.S. dairy exports [and producing] 18.5% of U.S. milk (Real California Milk, 2020).
The state currently has 1,750 dairy farms that houses 1.79 million milk cows [each
producing] 22,000 pounds of milk in a recent year (See California, 2017). In 2017,
Tulare county was the highest milk producer in California, with more than 27% of the
state’s milk production (Real California Milk, 2020). To add, the state has
approximately 127 digester projects with 34 of those projects currently operating
and 93 in development (Dairy Cares, 2012).

Southern California Edison Page ii

Emerging Products August 2020
Wastewater Treatment and Process Water Recycling Systems PPYYSCEETXXXX

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

BOD Biochemical Oxygen Demand

COD Chemical Oxygen Demand

FOG Fats, Oils, and Grease

GHG Greenhouse Gases

GPD Gallons Per Day

RO Reverse Osmosis Membranes

TDS Total Dissolved Solids

TKN Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen

TSS Total Suspended Solids

UF Ultrafiltration Membranes

WWTP Wastewater Treatment Plant

Southern California Edison Page iii

Emerging Products August 2020
Wastewater Treatment and Process Water Recycling Systems PPYYSCEETXXXX

CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ______________________________________________________ I
Water Reuse .............................................................................................. i
Energy Savings ..........................................................................................ii
Current Market ..........................................................................................ii

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ____________________________________________ III

INTRODUCTION __________________________________________________________ 8

BACKGROUND __________________________________________________________ 9
Water and Wastewater Electric Use in California ............................................ 9
Contribution to Wastewater Market Transformation ........................................ 9
Market Barriers ........................................................................................10
Trust .................................................................................................10
Heavy Regulations: .............................................................................10
Operational Constraints: ......................................................................10
Lack of Knowledge and Experience with the Technology ............................10
Technology Acquisition Costs ................................................................10
Existing Customer Infrastructure ...........................................................11
Lack of Immediate Financial Incentives or Assistance ...............................11
Competing Interest with Local Government Water Agencies.......................11

TECHNOLOGY/PRODUCT EVALUATION _______________________________________ 12

ENVIRO ..................................................................................................12
Energy Savings ...................................................................................12
Water Savings ....................................................................................13
GHG Impacts ......................................................................................13
Agriculture – Lab Test Results ...............................................................13
Agriculture – Field Test Results .............................................................14
Municipal – Lab Test Results .................................................................14
ClearCapture ...........................................................................................15
Energy Savings ...................................................................................16
Water Savings ....................................................................................16
Energy Production ...............................................................................16
GHG Impacts ......................................................................................16
Capital Savings ...................................................................................16
Scalability ..........................................................................................17
Field Test Results ................................................................................17
ClearCove Harvester .................................................................................18
Energy Savings ...................................................................................18
Energy Production ...............................................................................19
Capital Savings ...................................................................................19
Municipal – Field Test Results ................................................................19
EcoVolt ...................................................................................................19

Southern California Edison Page iv

Emerging Products August 2020
Wastewater Treatment and Process Water Recycling Systems PPYYSCEETXXXX

Energy Savings and Energy Production ...................................................20

Water Savings ....................................................................................20
GHG Impacts ......................................................................................20
Scalability ..........................................................................................20
Field Test Results ................................................................................20
BIDA – Biodynamic Dynamic Aerobic System ...............................................21
Energy Savings ...................................................................................22
Water Savings ....................................................................................22
GHG Impacts ......................................................................................23
Field Test Results ................................................................................23
Removal Efficiency Results ...................................................................23
AST ........................................................................................................24
Potential Water Savings .......................................................................24
Potential Energy Savings ......................................................................24
Environmental Benefits ........................................................................24
CLARA Manure Separation and Nutrient Management System .........................24
Environmental Benefits ........................................................................25
Potential Water Savings .......................................................................25

GRANT FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES ___________________________________________ 26

GHG EFFICIENCY ______________________________________________________ 27

DISCUSSION ___________________________________________________________ 29
Strategic and Intelligent Outreach and Education Partnerships ........................29
Eliminating Market Barriers ........................................................................29
Providing Technical Assistance and Tools .....................................................30
Leveraging All Applicable Financial Solution Resources ...................................30

CONCLUSIONS _________________________________________________________ 31

RECOMMENDATIONS ____________________________________________________ 32

REFERENCES ___________________________________________________________ 33

Southern California Edison Page v

Emerging Products August 2020
Wastewater Treatment and Process Water Recycling Systems PPYYSCEETXXXX

FIGURES
Figure 1 The ENVIRO Technology ................................................ 12
Figure 2 ClearCapture Tank Process ............................................. 15
Figure 3 Bear Republic Brewing Company - EcoVolt Solution Layout . 21
Figure 4 Lagunitas Brewing Company - EcoVolut Solution Layout ..... 21
Figure 5 Overview of BIDA System .............................................. 22
Figure 6 GHG Emissions Comparison from Livestock Manure
Treatment Systems in California .................................. 23
Figure 7 Annual Statewide GHGH Emissions .................................. 27

TABLES
Table 1. Grants and Technologies Qualification .......................... 26
Table 2. CO2 emissions per MWh of electricity ............................ 27

EQUATIONS
Equation 1 ENVIRO Agriculture Lab Test - Number of GPD .............. 13
Equation 2 ENVIRO Agriculture Lab Test - Estimated acre foot per
day ......................................................................... 13
Equation 3: ENVIRO Agriculture Lab Test- Energy demand .............. 13
Equation 4: ENVIRO Agriculture Lab Test- Conventional solution
energy demand ......................................................... 13
Equation 5: ENVIRO Agriculture Lab Test- Daily kWh savings per
unit ......................................................................... 14
Equation 6: ENVIRO Agriculture Lab Test- Annual kWh savings per
unit ......................................................................... 14
Equation 7: ENVIRO Agriculture Lab Test- kW reduction per unit ...... 14
Equation 8: ENVIRO Municipal Lab Test- Number of gallons per
year ........................................................................ 14
Equation 9: ENVIRO Municipal Lab Test- Estimated savings per
million gallons of water .............................................. 14
Equation 10: ENVIRO Municipal Lab Test- Annual kWh savings per
unit ......................................................................... 14

Southern California Edison Page vi

Emerging Products August 2020
Wastewater Treatment and Process Water Recycling Systems PPYYSCEETXXXX

Equation 11: ENVIRO Municipal Lab Test- kW reduction per unit ...... 15
Equation 12: ClearCapture Field Test- Percentage of energy
savings for Cheese Process Facility .............................. 17
Equation 13: ClearCapture Field Test- Percentage of cost savings
for Cheese Process Facility .......................................... 17
Equation 14: ClearCapture Field Test- Percentage of energy
savings for Milk Process Facility ................................... 18
Equation 15: ClearCapture Field Test- Percentage of cost savings
for Milk Process Facility .............................................. 18

Southern California Edison Page vii

Emerging Products August 2020
Wastewater Treatment and Process Water Recycling Systems ET18SCE7070

INTRODUCTION
These wastewater technologies address key environmental issues and provide solutions to
combat climate change by reducing energy consumption and GHG emissions while treating
wastewater that can be recycled. By treating wastewater on-site, it is possible to reduce
transportation of wastewater to a nearby municipal wastewater treatment facility.

SCE, along with many utilities across the country, are studying or conducting work with new
wastewater technologies. However, much of the work has been narrowly tailored to achieve
specific goals and does not provide the full picture of all activities and outcomes in this
space.

This white paper was designed to aid SCE in prioritizing activities and efforts to support
electrification and GHG emissions reduction goals. Three outcomes of this white paper are to
present findings to a broader stakeholder group, inform the audience on why SCE is actively
involved in this space, and help support market transformation.

All the technologies mentioned in this white paper were reviewed and vetted by RMS Energy
Consulting. This white paper is not intended to canvas all available wastewater technologies.

Southern California Edison Page 8

Emerging Products August 2020
Wastewater Treatment and Process Water Recycling Systems ET18SCE7070

BACKGROUND
According to the United States Environmental Protection Agency, drinking water plants and
wastewater plants are one of the country’s largest energy consumers, accounting for 30 to
40 percent of the total energy consumed in the country. Incorporating energy efficiency
practices into water and wastewater plants can save municipalities and utilities 15 to 30
percent of their total energy use (U.S. EPA, 2020). By reducing water and wastewater
energy use by 10 percent using demand management and cost-effective investments in
energy efficiency, the U.S. EPA estimates savings of about $400 million annually (U.S. EPA,
2020).

Water and wastewater treatment facilities run pumps, motors, and other additional
equipment for 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Water and wastewater facilities are
among the largest energy consumers in communities – and thus among the largest
contributors to the community’s GHG emissions (U.S. EPA, 2013). When looking at the
energy used by water and wastewater from utilities nationally, a study shows that utilities
account for 35 percent of typical U.S. municipal energy budgets (NYSERDA, 2008).

The technologies listed in this white paper will aid SCE in reducing energy consumption and
GHG emissions from water and wastewater transportation. The technologies are broken
down into two separate categories: agricultural and municipal. The individual estimated
energy use numbers were provided by the project’s owners. By implementing any of the
projects in this white paper, utilities can reduce their energy consumption and greenhouse
gases to meet California’s 2045 decarbonization goals (SCE, 2019).

WATER AND WASTEWATER ELECTRIC USE IN CALIFORNIA

California’s water infrastructure uses a tremendous amount of energy to collect,
move, and treat water; dispose of wastewater; and power the large pumps that
move water throughout the state (Energy Commission, 2005). Wastewater treatment
plants use 1,600 kWh to 3,300 kWh of electricity per million gallons of flow treated
(Energy Commission, 2020). California wastewater systems collect and treat 4 billion
gallons of sewage per day for over 13 million households in 58 counties and 482
cities (ASCE, 2019). California wastewater systems collect an estimated total of 1.46
trillion gallons of sewage annually, which leads to an average of 3.577 trillion kWh of
electricity use per million gallons of flow treated. At wastewater treatment plants,
aeration, pumping, and solids processing account for most of the electricity that is
used (CRS, 2017).

CONTRIBUTION TO WASTEWATER MARKET TRANSFORMATION

Over the years, utilities have been looking for the right way to propose wastewater
energy efficient technologies but have run into market barriers such as lack of
knowledge and understanding among customers. Utilities, such as Southern
California Edison, have put together easy to understand templates to help customers
be more aware of the situation.
The California Energy Commission (CEC) has put together a detailed action plan to
help California reach and fulfill the mandate in California Public Resources Code
Section 25310(c), which pushes California to double the statewide energy efficiency
savings in electricity and natural gases. The CEC’s action plan builds off of Senate Bill
350, which requires the California Energy Commission to establish annual targets

Southern California Edison Page 9

Emerging Products August 2020
Wastewater Treatment and Process Water Recycling Systems ET18SCE7070

that will achieve a cumulative doubling of statewide energy efficiency savings and
demand reductions in electricity and natural gas final end uses (CEC, 2017).
Although California has pushed forward SB350, the state is expected to fall short 44
percent, of the 2030 doubling goal for electricity savings. The utilities are capturing
most of the savings through codes and standards support, as well as incentive
programs (CEC, 2019). With water and wastewater accounting for 1/3 of the energy
use, utilities are looking for emerging technologies or demand response programs
that can help reduce the energy consumption.

MARKET BARRIERS

TRUST
Dairy farmers and Food Processors build their business and community relationships
based on trust. Currently, there is a sense of distrust with government regulations as
many dairy farmers are going out of business due to ineffective government
subsidies, oversupply of dairy products resulting in falling product pricing and USDA
organic regulations and tariffs.

HEAVY REGULATIONS:
The food processing industries have been slow to adopt new technologies as the
industry is heavily regulated by food safety and sanitation standards. Therefore,
water and energy efficiency upgrade activities must not jeopardize the facility's
compliance with food safety and sanitation standards. This problem is compounded
because food processing industries rely heavily on water and energy to conduct
business, but both are often managed separately.

OPERATIONAL CONSTRAINTS:
It is well understood that saving water also saves energy. The problem with water is
twofold: shortage and contamination. The problem with energy is also twofold: high
demand and high cost. Because both water and energy represent big problems in
California’s Central Valley where many of the food processing resides and food
processor businesses are at financial risks.

LACK OF KNOWLEDGE AND EXPERIENCE WITH THE TECHNOLOGY

California’s Central Valley dairy farmers are consumed by operational issues every
second of each day. Thus, they do not have the luxury of studying new and emerging
technologies that evolve and improve. As a result, dairy farmers’ lack of knowledge
and experience with newly proposed technology solutions often result in low adoption
rates.

TECHNOLOGY ACQUISITION COSTS

One of the many hurdles on-site wastewater processing faces is technology
acquisition cost. Many of these wastewater ideas approach cost of half a million or
more. As on-site wastewater processing is a relatively new idea, the cost for
manufacturing remains high. To help ease the technology acquisition cost, local,

Southern California Edison Page 10

Emerging Products August 2020
Wastewater Treatment and Process Water Recycling Systems ET18SCE7070

state government, and other organizations offer multiple funding opportunities

through grants. Table 1 demonstrates the available grant funding opportunities as
well as which technologies are likely to qualify for each opportunity.

EXISTING CUSTOMER INFRASTRUCTURE

Alongside funding, is customer adoption. With on-site wastewater processing,
customers will need to have a location that can store the equipment as well as be
informed on how the equipment works. Not a lot of dairy farmers or industrial food
processing facilities have existing wastewater treatment systems in place. These new
onsite recycle and reuse wastewater technology systems benefit from an existing
system in place as they are part of the wastewater treatment system. If an existing
system is not currently installed, this will increase the total costs when implementing
these new technologies.

LACK OF IMMEDIATE FINANCIAL INCENTIVES OR ASSISTANCE

Investor-owned utility (IOU) programs offer rebate and incentive programs that help
buy down the capital costs for energy efficient technologies. However, IOU incentive
programs have cost effective metrics that are siloed. The current energy efficiency
policy framework in California only counts energy efficiency savings benefits into its
cost-effectiveness calculations and does not consider other benefits including
reducing GHG, nitrate levels, water use, or onsite generation. This limitation results
in lower financial incentives to assist customers adopt viable onsite recycle and reuse
systems because the holistic end-to-end benefit assessment do not consider these
other real-world benefits.
Additionally, outside of IOU energy efficiency rebate and incentive programs, there
are not enough water sector grant funding or incentive programs that compare to
the scale of IOU incentive programs. Although there was a recent push to
immediately provide water sector grant funding programs to alleviate the technology
adoption costs, the financial assistance is not lucrative enough to justify the
acquisition cost for agricultural dairy farmers.

COMPETING INTEREST WITH LOCAL GOVERNMENT WATER AGENCIES

Although onsite recycle and reuse wastewater systems provide great benefits for
end-use customers, the technology’s system benefits pose a financial risk to local
government water agencies because reducing wastewater sent to the city’s
wastewater treatment plant results in less revenue for the local government.

Southern California Edison Page 11

Emerging Products August 2020
Wastewater Treatment and Process Water Recycling Systems ET18SCE7070

TECHNOLOGY/PRODUCT EVALUATION
In a typical wastewater treatment facility, most of its energy consumption comes from
pumping to treat wastewater. New wastewater technologies provide unique solutions to
reduce energy consumption and costs while treating wastewater. With these technologies, it
can provide solutions for customers in agriculture and food commercial industries in
reducing water consumption, energy consumption, and gas emissions. It will steer these
customers to run their facilities in a more sustainable and profitable way.

ENVIRO
WTG Cleantech’s ENVIRO combines five separate processes of a traditional water
treatment into a singular portable, high throughput, low-footprint unit that removes
the majority of suspended solids, metals, and other pollutants from any water source
(WTG, 2019). The ENVIRO technology is marketed for both agriculture and municipal
areas. ENVIRO provides the solution for reusing water from dairy lagoons; thus,
eliminating the need of dairy lagoons and reducing GHG emissions. No civil
construction is needed. It is designed to be a plug and play installation where the
machine comes fully assembled as shown Figure 1. This portable and fully mobile
unit can process up to 6,600 gallons per hour. The ENVIRO technology can help its
customers and the utilities to reduce gas emissions, energy consumption, and water
demand for its customers.

FIGURE 1 THE ENVIRO TECHNOLOGY

ENERGY SAVINGS
A typical wastewater treatment plant uses 2,309 kWh per 1 million gallons, whereas
the ENVIRO technology uses 606 kWh per 1 million gallons. The estimated savings
per 1 million gallons is 1703 kWh. From Equation 6, its estimated annual kWh saving
per unit is 32,850 kWh operating at 22 hours per day. ENVIRO reduces energy
consumption for water pumping due its ability to remove contaminants as explained
under Water Savings.

Southern California Edison Page 12

Emerging Products August 2020
Wastewater Treatment and Process Water Recycling Systems ET18SCE7070

WATER SAVINGS
The ENVIRO technology is designed to reduce 99.9% of solids, 64% of Total Kjeldahl
Nitrogen (TKN), and over 90% of phosphorous and nitrates below the levels
mandated in the state of California. The contaminants impact both water
consumption and GHG emissions in the agriculture industry, especially in dairy and
other animal farming facilities. Existing wastewater technologies struggle to break
down these premier contaminants to meet requirements to reuse the wastewater to
irrigate crops, provide drinking water to cows, etc. Wastewater is transferred to
nearby lagoons where clean water is pumped from the ground to dilute and reuse
the wastewater for crops. Approximately hundreds of thousands of gallons are used
in this process. However, the ENVIRO technology, can reduce these premier
contaminants in the water to be reused in the facility without having to pump clean
water.

GHG IMPACTS
In the field test results, the ENVIRO technology can reduce solids, TKN, phosphorus,
and nitrates responsible for GHG emissions. Over time, it can eliminate the need of
dirty dairy lagoons as they are one of the big contributors for GHG emissions.

AGRICULTURE – LAB TEST RESULTS

With the ENVIRO technology we can see from Equation 1 that the number of gallons
per day (GPD) processed is 145,200 GPD. According to ENVIRO 400 kWh is needed
to pump 326,000 gallons per acre foot. From Equation 7 we can determine the
reduction per unit is estimated to be 4.1 kW/hr. A daily estimated net savings of 90
kWh and annual estimated savings of 32,850 kWh can be reached using the ENVIRO
technology.

BASELINE INFORMATION
22ℎ𝑟 𝑔𝑎𝑙 𝑔𝑎𝑙
∗ 6,600 145,200
𝑑𝑎𝑦 ℎ𝑟 𝑑𝑎𝑦

EQUATION 1 ENVIRO AGRICULTURE LAB TEST - NUMBER OF GPD

𝑔𝑎𝑙
145,200 𝐴𝑐𝑟𝑒 𝐹𝑜𝑜𝑡
𝑑𝑎𝑦
.45
𝑔𝑎𝑙 𝑑𝑎𝑦
326,000
1 𝑎𝑐𝑟𝑒 𝑓𝑜𝑜𝑡

EQUATION 2 ENVIRO AGRICULTURE LAB TEST - ESTIMATED ACRE FOOT PER DAY

𝑘𝑊ℎ
22 ℎ𝑟 ∗ 4 𝑘𝑊ℎ 88
𝑑𝑎𝑦

EQUATION 3: ENVIRO AGRICULTURE LAB TEST- ENERGY DEMAND

𝑘𝑊ℎ 𝑘𝑊ℎ
. 45 𝐴𝑐𝑟𝑒 𝐹𝑜𝑜𝑡 ∗ 400 178
𝐴𝑐𝑟𝑒 𝐹𝑜𝑜𝑡 𝐷𝑎𝑦

EQUATION 4: ENVIRO AGRICULTURE LAB TEST- CONVENTIONAL SOLUTION ENERGY DEMAND

Southern California Edison Page 13

Emerging Products August 2020
Wastewater Treatment and Process Water Recycling Systems ET18SCE7070

𝑘𝑊ℎ 𝑘𝑊ℎ 𝑘𝑊ℎ

178 88 90
𝐷𝑎𝑦 𝐷𝑎𝑦 𝐷𝑎𝑦

EQUATION 5: ENVIRO AGRICULTURE LAB TEST- DAILY KWH SAVINGS PER UNIT

90𝑘𝑊ℎ 𝐷𝑎𝑦𝑠 𝑘𝑊ℎ

∗ 365 32,850
𝐷𝑎𝑦 𝑌𝑒𝑎𝑟 𝑌𝑒𝑎𝑟

EQUATION 6: ENVIRO AGRICULTURE LAB TEST- ANNUAL KWH SAVINGS PER UNIT

𝑘𝑊ℎ
32,850 𝑘𝑊
𝑌𝑒𝑎𝑟 4.1
ℎ𝑟 ℎ𝑟
8030
𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟

EQUATION 7: ENVIRO AGRICULTURE LAB TEST- KW REDUCTION PER UNIT

AGRICULTURE – FIELD TEST RESULTS

Preliminary data in field trials show 99.9% reduction of solids, 64% reduction in total
TKN, and over 90% reduction in Phosphorous. This technology can reduce nitrates
below the levels mandated. Suspended solids, TKN, and Phosphorous are premier
contaminants responsible for the bulk of GHG emissions in California that need to be
reduced at livestock facilities (WTG, 2019).
WTG Cleantech’s ENVIRO is also marketed for municipal treatment facilities. This
technology can further help municipal facilities to reduce energy consumption, GHG
emissions, and water demand.

MUNICIPAL – LAB TEST RESULTS

If the machine runs for 20 hours per day, estimated annual kWh savings will be
82,051 kWh per year or 225 kWh per day. Equation 8 shows the number of gallons
that ENVIRO can treat per year if it operates 20 hours per day with its capability of
processing up to 6,600 gallons per hour (WTG, 2019).

ℎ𝑟 𝑑𝑎𝑦 𝑔𝑎𝑙 𝑔𝑎𝑙

20 ∗ 365 ∗ 6,600 48,180,000
𝑑𝑎𝑦 𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟 ℎ𝑟 𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟

EQUATION 8: ENVIRO MUNICIPAL LAB TEST- NUMBER OF GALLONS PER YEAR

𝑘𝑊ℎ 𝑘𝑊ℎ 𝑘𝑊ℎ

𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑣𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑎𝑡𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝐸𝑁𝑉𝐼𝑅𝑂 2,309 606 1703
𝑚𝑖𝑙𝑙𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑔𝑎𝑙 𝑚𝑖𝑙𝑙𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑔𝑎𝑙 𝑚𝑖𝑙𝑙𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑔𝑎𝑙

EQUATION 9: ENVIRO MUNICIPAL LAB TEST- ESTIMATED SAVINGS PER MILLION GALLONS OF WATER

𝑔𝑎𝑙 𝑘𝑊ℎ 𝑘𝑊ℎ

48,180,000 ∗ 1703 82,051
𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟 𝑚𝑖𝑙𝑙𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑔𝑎𝑙 𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟

EQUATION 10: ENVIRO MUNICIPAL LAB TEST- ANNUAL KWH SAVINGS PER UNIT

Southern California Edison Page 14

Emerging Products August 2020
Wastewater Treatment and Process Water Recycling Systems ET18SCE7070

𝑘𝑊ℎ
82,051
𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟
11.24𝑘𝑊
ℎ𝑟
7300
𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟

EQUATION 11: ENVIRO MUNICIPAL LAB TEST- KW REDUCTION PER UNIT

CLEARCAPTURE
The ClearCove technology is based on a non-biological and physical-chemical
process, encompassing settling and screening to provide enhanced capture of
organics. ClearCove delivers its technology to the Food & Beverage (F&B) market via
its ClearCapture™ system, and to the municipal market via the Harvester™ system.
This system is a compact, modular, and scalable technology for enhanced primary
treatment of F&B wastewater, [which will allow agriculture and other food process
areas to benefit from the ClearCapture system] (ClearCove SCE Ideas Application,
2020). The system is capable of processing up to 60,000 GPD per ClearCapture tank.
Figure 2 shows a step-by-step process on how the wastewater is treated inside the
ClearCapture tank.

FIGURE 2 CLEARCAPTURE TANK PROCESS

The ClearCapture technology uses Ultrafiltration (UF) and Reverse Osmosis (RO)
membranes downstream, allowing F&B facilities to recover 80+% of their process
wastewater to reusable water. The technology can also remove approximately 90+%
of solids and 40-60% of organics (ClearCove PPT, 2017). ClearCapture technology
has two product models: F1400 and P1400.
The F1400 model is used for primary treatment that can help replace conventional
primary solutions such as Dissolved Air Flotation (DAF). Similarly, the P1400 model
is used for primary treatment paired with UF and RO membranes for a complete

Southern California Edison Page 15

Emerging Products August 2020
Wastewater Treatment and Process Water Recycling Systems ET18SCE7070

treatment system thus replacing a traditional aerobic treatment system that is

susceptible to upsets. A traditional aerobic treatment injects oxygen to process
water, facilitating a biological degradation process in which biochemical oxygen
demand (BOD) is converted into biomass, carbon dioxide, and water (Aviles, 2017).
The ClearCapture technology is estimated to consume less energy and reduce the
use of chemicals more efficiently than a traditional DAF system. Non-energy benefits
such as water savings, GHG emissions reduction, and energy production are some of
the many additional benefits that can be achieved with this technology.

ENERGY SAVINGS
The ClearCapture technology uses approximately 50% less energy than conventional
solutions, while treating wastewater to reusable levels. This energy savings is a
result of ClearCove’s patented process which relies on gravity settling and screening
in combination with the physical membranes, eliminating the need for the blowers
and mixers associated with biological processes. For example, in a case study, the
ClearCapture technology is compared to other conventional solutions such as
DAF/Anaerobic MBR at a cheese process facility and has a 63.9% estimated energy
savings.

WATER SAVINGS
ClearCapture helped a cheese processing facility to recover approximately 230,000
GPD or 83,950,000 Gallons annually for on-site reuse in the form of cow drinking
water, irrigation water, etc.

ENERGY PRODUCTION
Energy production is made possible due to ClearCapture technology being a physical-
chemical process that captures organics having higher methane potential than those
that are degraded and captured in a biological process. In the cheese plant example,
the captured methane can be used to generate approximately 5,000 MWh/year,
resulting in a net positive wastewater system.

GHG IMPACTS
The ClearCapture system can be deployed as on-site distributed wastewater
treatment thus reducing the load on the municipal wastewater treatment plant which
typically involves an aerobic process, consuming more energy and producing more
GHG emissions.

CAPITAL SAVINGS
The ClearCapture technology is skid mounted and highly modular resulting in a lower
capital investment than conventional technologies that typically require significant
concrete tank construction (ClearCove SCE Ideas Application, 2020). This is
beneficial, not only in terms of cost, but also for the reduction of GHG emissions due
to concrete trucks not moving as much concrete for construction. In the cheese plant
example, the ClearCapture solution cost was approximately $5-6M while the
conventional system proposed was approximately $7-9M (ClearCove SCE Ideas
Application, 2020).

Southern California Edison Page 16

Emerging Products August 2020
Wastewater Treatment and Process Water Recycling Systems ET18SCE7070

SCALABILITY
The ClearCapture technology offers superior scalability to conventional wastewater
solutions. Each ClearCapture tank will treat approximately 60,000 GPD with a
modular expansion approach as flows increase. In the cheese plant example, six (6)
ClearCapture tanks are installed to provide up to 360,000 GPD of total treatment
capacity. Five (5) of the 6 ClearCapture tanks are active while the remaining one is
reserved as wastewater flow increases (ClearCove SCE Ideas Application, 2020).

FIELD TEST RESULTS

The ClearCapture was piloted at a cheese process facility having a wastewater flow of
260,000 GPD. The results showed over 99% removal of chemical oxygen demand
(COD) for the ClearCapture: Pure system, corresponding to an average COD
discharge level of approximately 60 mg/L. In addition, the system removed 99.7-
100% of suspended solids and 99.2-99.8% of dissolved solids, corresponding to
discharge levels of less than 2mg/L of total suspended solids (TSS) and less than
25mg/L of total dissolved solids (TDS). The effluent from the ClearCapture: Pure
system was test for various contaminants to determine its suitability for animal
consumption. The tests showed that effluent water was safe for animal consumption
but also meets levels required for human consumption (ClearCove, 2016). With
ClearCapture technology, its electrical consumption is estimated to be 1,573,342
kWh annually with estimated operation and maintenance (O&M) costs of $258,080.
Compared to other conventional solutions, for example, DAF/Anaerobic MBR
consumes 2,462,246.84 kWh annually with estimated O&M costs of $1,008,787. The
net savings for ClearCove versus conventional solution are 888,904.84 kWh and
$750,707 in O&M costs. As a result, the cheese process facility can save 63.9% of its
energy by using the ClearCapture technology as shown in Equation 12.

𝐶𝑙𝑒𝑎𝑟𝐶𝑎𝑝𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑒 𝑇𝑒𝑐ℎ𝑛𝑜𝑙𝑜𝑔𝑦 𝑘𝑊ℎ 1,573,342 𝑘𝑊ℎ

∗ 100 63.9%
𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑣𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑆𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑘𝑊ℎ 2,462,246.84 𝑘𝑊ℎ

EQUATION 12: CLEARCAPTURE FIELD TEST- PERCENTAGE OF ENERGY SAVINGS FOR CHEESE PROCESS FACILITY

𝐶𝑙𝑒𝑎𝑟𝐶𝑎𝑝𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑒 𝑇𝑒𝑐ℎ𝑛𝑜𝑙𝑜𝑔𝑦 $ $258,080

∗ 100 25.6%
𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑣𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑆𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 $ $1,008,787

EQUATION 13: CLEARCAPTURE FIELD TEST- PERCENTAGE OF COST SAVINGS FOR CHEESE PROCESS FACILITY

Similar technology was implemented at a milk process facility with a wastewater flow
of 18,000 Gallons per Day (GPD). ClearCapture: Fine and ClearCapture Pure systems
were used for this pilot testing. ClearCapture: Fine consists of a physical/chemical
reactor platform containing a 250-gallon working volume clarifier tank and the
“Screen Box” (SBX) decanting system, as well as a pump skid that controls the
operation of the system. The ClearCapture: Pure adds a membrane filtration unit to
the ClearCapture: Fine system. The purpose of this case study was to determine the
effectiveness of the two systems in treating wastewater from the milk production
processes. The results showed 70-85% removal of Biochemical Oxygen Demand
(BOD) for the ClearCapture: Fine system, corresponding to an average BOD
discharge level of approximately 1000 mg/L. The system removed 90-95% of

Southern California Edison Page 17

Emerging Products August 2020
Wastewater Treatment and Process Water Recycling Systems ET18SCE7070

suspended solids. On the ClearCapture: Pure system, it was able to remove 80-90%
of the remaining BOD in the ClearCapture: Fine effluent. The ClearCapture: Pure was
also able to remove 99-100% of suspended solids, leading to discharge levels of less
than 2 mg/L (ClearCove,2016).
This technology can provide additional benefits such as energy savings and costs. For
example, with ClearCapture technology, its electrical consumption is estimated to be
153,310 kWh annually with estimated operation and maintenance (O&M) costs of
$12,335. Compared to other conventional solutions, such as DAF/Anaerobic MBR
consumes 212,339 kWh annually with estimated O&M costs of $69,839. The net
savings for ClearCove versus conventional solutions are 59,029 kWh and $ 57,504 in
O&M costs. By using ClearCapture, it will help the milk process facility save an
estimated 72.2% of its energy as shown in Equation 14.
𝐶𝑙𝑒𝑎𝑟𝐶𝑎𝑝𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑒 𝑇𝑒𝑐ℎ𝑛𝑜𝑙𝑜𝑔𝑦 𝑘𝑊ℎ 153,310 kWh
∗ 100 72.2%
𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑣𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑆𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑘𝑊ℎ 212,339 kWh

EQUATION 14: CLEARCAPTURE FIELD TEST- PERCENTAGE OF ENERGY SAVINGS FOR MILK PROCESS FACILITY

𝐶𝑙𝑒𝑎𝑟𝐶𝑎𝑝𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑒 𝑇𝑒𝑐ℎ𝑛𝑜𝑙𝑜𝑔𝑦 $ $12,335

∗ 100 17.7%
𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑣𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑆𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 $ $69,839

EQUATION 15: CLEARCAPTURE FIELD TEST- PERCENTAGE OF COST SAVINGS FOR MILK PROCESS FACILITY

CLEARCOVE HARVESTER
ClearCove offers another technology geared towards the municipal market called the
Harvester. This technology is a complete headworks and primary treatment solution
for municipal applications that combines fine screening, grit removal, enhanced
primary clarification, and flow equalization into a single process compared to
conventional technologies that uses separate process and mechanical equipment for
all of the aforementioned. In addition, The Harvester can also be retrofitted into
existing processes to provide an enhanced primary treatment, [removing]
approximately up to 65% of the organics (BOD) versus conventional primary
treatment [that] removes approximately 30% (ClearCove SCE Ideas Applications,
2020). Municipal treatment facilities are challenged by load from several to many
facilities that need their water treated. ClearCove Harvester provides the solution to
treat wastewater more efficiently, helping these municipal treatment facilities to
reduce GHG emissions, costs, energy, and water demand. New York State Energy
Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA) supported the Harvester field
project at the Ithaca Area Wastewater Treatment Facility with wastewater flow of 7.5
Million Gallon per Day (MGD).

ENERGY SAVINGS
This unique technology removes approximately double the organics in the primary
treatment stage than a conventional technology. By removing the majority of the
organics at head of the plant, it reduces the organic load going to the secondary
treatment thus reducing the energy required to convert organics to biomass and CO2
and resulting in energy savings of 50+%.

Southern California Edison Page 18

Emerging Products August 2020
Wastewater Treatment and Process Water Recycling Systems ET18SCE7070

ENERGY PRODUCTION
The Harvester technology enables 200-300% more biogas generation via anaerobic
digestion by capturing most organics in the primary treatment stage versus
conventional primary treatment (ClearCove SCE Ideas Application, 2020).
In the field study at IAWWTF site, the Harvester technology can help the facility to
increase its energy generation from 2,200 MWh/year to approximately 4,000-7,000
MWh/year or $600,000/year in electricity value, resulting to a net-positive energy
consumption. (ClearCove SCE Ideas Application, 2020).

CAPITAL SAVINGS
The Harvester technology has an equivalent cost to conventional primary treatment.
However, cost advantages can occur if existing tanks can be used for retrofitting
opportunities.

MUNICIPAL – FIELD TEST RESULTS

ClearCove partnered with Ithaca Area Wastewater Treatment Facility (IAWWTF), a
municipal facility based in New York, to implement their Harvester technology at a
small scale for pilot testing. Currently, IAWWTF consumes 9,400 kWh/day or
3.4GWh/year. Aeration accounts for approximately 48% of this energy consumption
with 72% of the aeration energy consumed for removal of BOD or 3,275 kWh/day. If
the [Harvester technology] was installed at full scale, it is anticipated that aeration
energy consumption would be reduced to 1,500 kWh/day, [reducing] the total plant
energy consumption by 22 % to approximately 7,385 kWh/day or 2.7GWh/year
(Wright, 2015).

ECOVOLT
Cambrian Innovation’s EcoVolt uses exoelectrogens, electrically charged microbes, to
treat and create power from wastewater. This process is called
electromethanogenesis that enhances the anaerobic treatment. Exoelectrogens,
coated on anodes, consume the wastewater’s remaining organic pollutants and, in
the process, generate electricity (Matheson, 2014). This electricity is the result of the
EcoVolt producing methane gas from the wastewater. First, wastewater is sent
through a bio-electrochemical reactor called EcoVolt Reactor. As water filters through
it, exoelectrogens consume the organic waste in the water and release electrons as
their byproduct. These electrons are fed into a circuit that produces methane gas
(CH4). The methane gas is transferred to a cogeneration system for power
conversion. This process is accomplished by using an engine to burn the biogas with
a small portion of natural gas thus generating heat and electricity for the facility.
Depending on site factors, the EcoVolt solution can produce from 30-400 kW of
electricity. This allows customers to treat their wastewater on-site, reducing carbon
footprint and energy consumption as well as reducing its energy demand on the grid
that helps electric utilities prevent power shortages during on peak-hours of the day.
EcoVolt technology has several products for treating wastewater, which are the
reactor, membrane bioreactor (MBR), and EcoVolt mini. The EcoVolt Reactor is a
bioelectrically-enhanced anaerobic treatment solution that is suited for facilities
generating a wastewater flow of 15,000 to 300,000 GPD. The EcoVolt MBR is an
aerobic digester that combines [aeration, membrane filtration, and integrated
controls] to remove > 99% of contaminants from wastewater streams, enabling

Southern California Edison Page 19

Emerging Products August 2020
Wastewater Treatment and Process Water Recycling Systems ET18SCE7070

water reuse (Sustainable Wastewater-to-Renewable Energy Solutions, 2019). The

EcoVolt MBR can be easily integrate with the EcoVolt Reactor to treat wastewater
that can be reused in the facility while reducing energy demand. The MBR can be
used as a standalone solution for facilities with lower concentrations of organics
(Sustainable Wastewater-to-Renewable Energy Solutions, 2019). The EcoVolt Mini is
smaller in size and removes over 99% of BOD and TSS when compared to the
EcoVolt reactor. This small, standalone unit is intended for smaller facilities, having
lower daily wastewater flow. A typical EcoVolt solution includes the EcoVolt Reactor
for water treatment and biogas generation. An optional cogeneration system
converts biogas into clean electricity and heat. From this, facilities can customize
their EcoVolt solution to fit their needs.
The EcoVolt solution offers numerous benefits for customers in areas such as energy
production, energy consumption, water demand, and GHG emission reduction.

ENERGY SAVINGS AND ENERGY PRODUCTION

Being an enhanced anaerobic solution, it can treat water while producing high-quality
biogas that can be converted into electricity using a cogeneration system. The
EcoVolt Reactor eliminates an estimated 80-90% percent of BOD from the water
stream while converting carbon into renewable biogas (over 30 kW/Reactor)
(Cambrian Innovation Product Brochure, 2019). Generating power on-site, it can
help facilities to reduce its energy consumption on the grid.

WATER SAVINGS
The EcoVolt solution helps facilities to reduce their water demand by treating the
wastewater, removing 80-90% of pollutants, and producing reusable water that be
used for irrigation and other maintenance activities. In California, two brewing
facilities have implemented this technology to combat limited water resources and
water demand costs. For example, in the Lagunitas Brewing Company case study,
the EcoVolt solution was able treat 120,000 GPD and produce over 80,000 gallons of
clean, recycled water per day, reducing the water footprint by 40% (Aviles, 2017).

GHG IMPACTS
Breweries and wineries are faced with transporting their high-strength wastewater to
nearby municipal wastewater treatment facilities that can be over 50 miles away.
Being an on-site treatment solution, EcoVolt can help these facilities reduce truck
loading as well as carbon footprint. Bear Republic Brewing Company was able to
eliminate over 4,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions each year using the
EcoVolt solution (Aviles, 2017).

SCALABILITY
The EcoVolt solution is modular, scalable technology that can satisfy customer needs.
The EcoVolt technology offers products that allows customers to customize their
solutions at different scale, treatment, and/or service.

FIELD TEST RESULTS

In 2014, the brewing company implemented EcoVolt solution, consisting of two
EcoVolt Reactors and 95 kW of microturbine capacity (Figure 3), removing 80% of

Southern California Edison Page 20

Emerging Products August 2020
Wastewater Treatment and Process Water Recycling Systems ET18SCE7070

BOD and generating 70 % of methane gas. With this solution, it allows the customer
to meet sewer discharge requirements, reduce energy consumption, and eliminate
over 4,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide emission each year.

FIGURE 3 BEAR REPUBLIC BREWING COMPANY - ECOVOLT SOLUTION LAYOUT

In Figure 4, Lagunitas’s EcoVolt solution consists of three EcoVolt Reactors, three

EcoVolt MBRs and a reverse osmosis system, [treating] over 120,000 GPD, and
[producing] over 80,000 gallons of clean, recycled water per day. [Cutting] the
brewery’s water footprint by 40% while generating 130 kW of electrical power and
40,000 therms of heat per year (Aviles, 2017).

FIGURE 4 LAGUNITAS BREWING COMPANY - ECOVOLUT SOLUTION LAYOUT

BIDA – BIODYNAMIC DYNAMIC AEROBIC SYSTEM

BioFiltro’s BIDA (Biodynamic Aerobic) system uses earthworms and microbes to
degrade the organic load of wastewater. It removes up to 99% of wastewater
contaminants within four hours. This low-cost, organic wastewater treatment system
filters the wastewater on-site and converts it to clean reusable water and organic

Southern California Edison Page 21

Emerging Products August 2020
Wastewater Treatment and Process Water Recycling Systems ET18SCE7070

fertilizer for agriculture. BIDA system has been implemented in both agriculture and
industrial facilities.
The BIDA system consists of three main layers as shown in Figure 5. First,
wastewater is pumped into an irrigation system that will distribute the water evenly
on top of the first layer of the BIDA system. This first layer contains the wood
shavings, earthworms, and microbes. Wood shavings provide a habitable
environment for the earthworms. It also forms a biofilm that consists of billons of
microbes and bacteria that feed off the organic matter and nutrients from the
wastewater. Earthworms eat the organic solids from water. Once they digest, they
produce castings containing bacteria removing any contaminants in the water. These
worm castings can be used as soil fertilizer to improve crop yield, soil health, and
carbon sequestration. The second layer contains crushed rock that removes nitrogen
and helps maintain air chamber within the system to provide aerobic conditions to
the bottom of wood shaving layer. Third layer has drainage basins used for
maintaining an air chamber where air ventilated through PVC vent pipes that run
along the side of the system (BioFiltro, 2020).

FIGURE 5 OVERVIEW OF BIDA SYSTEM

Both SCE and customers can benefit from this technology in terms of energy
consumption, water demand and GHG reduction.

ENERGY SAVINGS
The BIDA system has low energy consumption due to pumping wastewater into the
irrigation system shown in Figure 5. These irrigation pumps are activated only due to
an irrigation schedule and/or a manual discharge of wastewater from the facility
(BioFiltro, 2019).

WATER SAVINGS
The BIDA system allows for on-farm recycling of water due to its ability to remove
85% of TSS and 80% of Nitrogen from dairy wastewater as an example. This
reusable, clean water can be applied in the dairy process or used for irrigation of
crops on-site. In a case study, the BIDA system helped Fetzer Vineyards recycle up
to 15 million gallons of water while reducing its energy consumption.

Southern California Edison Page 22

Emerging Products August 2020
Wastewater Treatment and Process Water Recycling Systems ET18SCE7070

GHG IMPACTS
Figure 6 demonstrates GHG emissions between baseline and BIDA systems, showing
that the BIDA system has lower GHG emissions compared to other baseline
technologies.

FIGURE 6 GHG EMISSIONS COMPARISON FROM LIVESTOCK MANURE TREATMENT SYSTEMS IN CALIFORNIA

FIELD TEST RESULTS

FETZER VINEYARDS – MENDOCINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA – USA

The BIDA system allows Fetzer to reduce its annual energy consumption by up 1
million kWh, recycle up to 15 million gallons of water, and generate nutrient rich
castings for application to the vineyards.

TAYLOR BROTHERS FARMS – SUTTER COUNTY, CALIFORNIA – USA

An additional field test, using the BIDA system, was performed at the Taylor Brothers
Farms, achieving an average BOD Effluent of 184 mg/L and TSS Effluent of 48 mg/L
from average BOD Influent of 4,373 mg/L and average TSS Influent of 4,621 mg/L.

EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROJECT – BIOFILTRO

In this project, they tested the performance of the BIDA system for removal of
organic contaminants in agricultural waste and energy consumption at two different
sites, Fresno State dairy farm and a large tomato processor located at Firebaugh,
California. Here, they evaluated the system’s organic effluents from these two
different sites.

REMOVAL EFFICIENCY RESULTS

At the Fresno state dairy farm, the BIDA system had a consistent and high removal
efficiency above 90% for nitrogen-based water quality parameters such as NH4,
NO3-N, and TKN. Removal efficiencies for BOD5 and COD were good. As for the large

Southern California Edison Page 23

Emerging Products August 2020
Wastewater Treatment and Process Water Recycling Systems ET18SCE7070

tomato processor site, it also performed consistently high with a removal efficiency
of above 90% for BOD5 and TSS (Zoldsoke, 2014).

AST
AST offers an innovative solution for treating wastewater into reusable water by
using floating bead filters. These floating bead filters are granular filters that are
periodically expanded (backwashing) for cleaning. They operate similar to sand filters
that are widely used in filtration of swimming pools. The media used in floating bead
filters has a specific gravity less than 1 (typically 0.9-0.95) thus the filtration beds
rest on the top of the filter rather on the bottom. The beads used consists of mostly
polyethylene beads with a diameter of 1/8 inch. These filters can be used as clarifiers
(removal of suspended particles), biofilters (removal of dissolved compounds), or
BioClarifiers (removing both solids and dissolved compounds concurrently) (Malone,
2018). BioClarifiers are used as biological treatment, secondary and tertiary clarifiers
thus replacing additional steps found in a traditional wastewater process.

POTENTIAL WATER SAVINGS

Oakview dairy facility has wastewater flow of 144,000 GPD. A 4:1 dilution is required
for dairy lagoons to reduce the nutrient concentrations of the water to tolerable
levels for crop irrigation. For example, every gallon of lagoon water used requires 4
gallons of fresh water, totaling to 576,000 GPD of fresh water for 144,000 GPD of
wastewater (Malone, 2018).

POTENTIAL ENERGY SAVINGS

576,000 GPD of fresh water is pumped using an estimated 100 HP pump. Using AST
technology, facilities can apply their lagoon water directly to the crops, saving 210
million gallons per year and energy required to pump that amount of water per year.
The net water savings is equivalent to the amount of fresh water required for dilution
and the net energy savings is equal to the energy required to pump 210 million
gallons of fresh water from the water table (Malone, 2018).

ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS
The current system requires an excess of water to be added to completely flood crop
plots. Approximately 50% of the water goes to the crops while the rest of the water
is either evaporated or leached back into the water table.
Per day, AST technology can remove 13.8lbs of Organic Nitrogen, 16.7lbs of Total
Nitrogen, and 8.34lbs of Phosphorous (Malone, 2019).

CLARA MANURE SEPARATION AND NUTRIENT

MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
CLARA is a manure separation and nutrient management system that will help
farmers stay in compliance by utilizing their existing manure capture systems while
meeting strict California regulations. This technology provides solutions in GHG
emissions, nutrient management, compost management, and water demand. By
doing so it will help dairy farmers meet existing mandates and remain in compliance.

Southern California Edison Page 24

Emerging Products August 2020
Wastewater Treatment and Process Water Recycling Systems ET18SCE7070

The CLARA system uses both mechanical and chemical science procedures to
separate solids in the flush water efficiently, while producing data analytics to verify
results captured. This system was implemented in an existing wastewater treatment
system at a large dairy site in Kern County near Bakersfield, California. First, manure
water reaches the treatment center, then it passes through a large fiber separator,
removing heavy fibers for bedding purposes. Secondly, water is pumped to a sand
lane to drop sand that may still be present in the flush water. After the sand lane,
the water is pumped from the Flush Water Holding Tank, where it can travel directly
into the CLARA system for treatment or into the digester where it can be treated by
the CLARA systems post-digestion.
The influent and effluent were tested before and after the digestor. High removal of
solids from the flush water happens in pre-digestion. At post-digestion, an additional
amount of solids is removed along with other contaminants. 1

ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS
At pre-digestion, with CLARA treatment system alone, it can remove approximately
87% of total volatile solids and 75% of TSS. However, with the total system
consisting of both the large fiber separator and CLARA treatment, it can remove
approximately 93% of TSS and 86% of total volatile solids. By combining the CLARA
system with a digestor, it can remove over 90% of TSS and volatile solids at post-
digestion.
The CLARA system can reduce nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P), and potassium (K)
loading. The technology is capable of removing a small amount of ammonium
nitrogen (NH3-N) which can be readily available to crops upon irrigation. With CLARA
treatment, it can remove approximately 27% of total nitrogen, 54% of organic
nitrogen, 5% of ammonia nitrogen and potassium, and lastly, 41% of total
phosphorus.
By focusing on compost management, the CLARA System can remove nutrient solids
quickly and efficiently from the flush water, eliminating the need of constantly having
to remove manure solids that have settled in separation pits, lagoons, etc. The end
result is a nutrient rich solid with higher nutrients levels compared to standard cow
or chicken compost.

POTENTIAL WATER SAVINGS

CLARA treatment system has a 67% removal rate of TSS, allowing farmers to use
their effluent for drip/pivot irrigation or for recycling back through their flush system;
thus, reducing the amount of fresh water needed for dilution.

1
Figure8 Enviro Regulations are Affecting Dairies – A Case for Cost-Effective Manure
Management

Southern California Edison Page 25

Emerging Products August 2020
 Wastewater Treatment and Process Water Recycling Systems ET18SCE7070

GRANT FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES

Costs for these new technologies can be overwhelming to customers who are looking for
new and efficient solutions to treat their wastewater in a sustainable matter. Grants from
local and state government and other organizations can help customers with costs on
purchasing a new technology for their facility. Table 1 lists the available grants with the
qualified wastewater technologies.

TABLE 1. GRANTS AND TECHNOLOGIES QUALIFICATION

GRANT NAME ENVIRO CLEARCOVE ECOVOLT BIDA AST CLARA

Electric Program Investment Charge (EPIC) Grant ● ● ● ● ● ●
WaterSMART Grant Program ● ● ● ● ● ●
Conservation Innovation Grant ● ● ● ● ● ●
Supporting Anaerobic Digestion in Communities ● ●
Organics Grant Program ● ● ● ●
Conservation Innovation Grants (CIG) On-Farm ● ● ● ● ● ●
Conversation Innovation Trials
Alternative Manure Management Program (AMMP) ● ●
Dairy Digester Research & Development Program ● ● ● ●
REAP Renewable Energy Systems and Energy ● ● ● ● ● ●
Efficiency Improvement Program

Southern California Edison Page 26

Emerging Products August 2020
Wastewater Treatment and Process Water Recycling Systems ET18SCE7070

GHG EFFICIENCY
Consistent with California’s goals to combat global warming and climate change, SCE has
transitioned from programs based purely on energy efficiency to seeking programs that
reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, most notably but not limited to carbon dioxide
(CO2). Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32) and Senate Bill 32 (SB 32) set goals for California to reduce
GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 and 40% below 1990 levels by 2030, with the
ultimate goal of 80% below 1990 levels by 2050.

FIGURE 7 ANNUAL STATEWIDE GHGH EMISSIONS

California’s historical emissions and targets under AB 32 and SB 32. (Adapted from
Greenblatt, 2015).

The contribution of wastewater treatment technologies on reduced water usage can be

converted to an electric savings based upon the energy intensity of water, or the average
amount of electricity required to pump, treat, or produce a unit of water. This is a
conservative estimate irrespective of available secondary effects such as load shifting or
peak demand reduction. This avoided electricity use, solely from the energy needed to
transport water, can then be converted into avoided carbon emissions for the purposes of
GHG reduction tracking.

TABLE 2.CO2 EMISSIONS PER MWH OF ELECTRICITY

Southern California Edison Page 27

Emerging Products August 2020
 Wastewater Treatment and Process Water Recycling Systems ET18SCE7070

SOURCE LBS CO2 /MWH REFERENCE

EPA AVERT 1,558.8 EPA 2019 AVERT, US national weighted average CO2 marginal emission rate to
convert reductions of kWh into avoided units of carbon dioxide emissions, 2018
data.
CARB 941.4 ARB (2016). Technical support document on GHG inventory methodologies for
the 2000-2014 inventory.
CEC 581 Economics Subgroup of California’s Climate Action Team, October 2007.
SCE 534 SCE’s 2019 Sustainability Report.

Table 2 shows the approximate amount of CO2 emissions for each MWh of electricity as
calculated by various sources. These values are dependent on the emission factors of the
electricity generation avoided by reduced water usage.

The EPA value is a nationally weighted average that is calculated to represent the emissions
of marginal power generation, or the unit of power generation that is serving the most
recent increment of demand on the power grid. As baseload power generation is assumed to
run constantly, any reductions in electrical demand will mainly affect marginal power plants,
known as “peaker” power plants, that can be brought online on short notice to meet excess
demand. The EPA emission rate thus represents a significant proportion of these typically
less-efficient natural gas burning plants with increased GHG emissions.

The CARB value is calculated to represent California’s state GHG emissions more accurately.
However, California imports a significant amount of power from out-of-state sources, the
origin of which is often unknown. These unspecified imports have unknown fuel and
generation mixes, so their emission rates are based upon a predetermined emission factor
as determined by the CARB. In-state power generation and imports from known specific
origins are well documented with precise amounts of fuel used, so their specific emission
factors are more accurate.

The CEC value attempts to meld in-state and imported power generation with the presence
of renewable energy sources to obtain a default emission factor. This is based upon
assumptions related to the percentage of imported electricity and a 33% CA Renewables
Portfolio Standard as required by Senate Bill X1-2 (SB X1-2).

The SCE value is based upon “CO2 emissions associated with electric power generation from
all sources of SCE equity-owned generation and purchased power (specified and unspecified
power purchases) delivered to electric power customers” in the most recent calendar year
and is the most accurate emission factor to calculate avoided GHG emissions for any
wastewater technologies implemented within SCE territory.

As outlined in Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32), California has a long-standing goal to meet carbon
reduction objectives. These objectives combined with the 2008-2020 BBEES goals created
the vision of where and how the market could transform to achieve higher efficiency.
Although SCE’s ET program pioneered decades of applied research, in which EE was the
initial driver, SCE and other relevant stakeholders are now centering its attention to include
GHG emission reductions as part of California’s future goals and objectives.

Southern California Edison Page 28

Emerging Products August 2020
Wastewater Treatment and Process Water Recycling Systems ET18SCE7070

DISCUSSION
California Dairies account for approximately 38.2% of all the electricity used in the
agricultural sector and dairy farms and dairy-related food processing accounts for 32% of all
California’s non-residential electric use.2 Both energy and water utilities would benefit from
reduced water and energy use within the agricultural sector.

As described in this paper, onsite recycling and reuse wastewater technologies and systems
have a significant potential to reduce both water, energy, and GHG emissions. The
technologies identified in this study suggest that onsite recycling and reuse wastewater
systems can immediately transfer into the current custom incentive programs. However, the
current customized energy efficiency incentive programs’ cost effectiveness test must
consider other benefits beyond energy efficiency for technology adoption to succeed.
Therefore, there are some foundational activities that must occur before the technology can
successfully migrate into the customized incentive programs.

STRATEGIC AND INTELLIGENT OUTREACH AND EDUCATION

PARTNERSHIPS
Many of the challenges with moving forward with wastewater ideas is customer
knowledge. As on-site wastewater is relatively new, it is important that we spend
time educating potential customers on the benefits of adopting on-site wastewater.
Although, education is a major issue, the customers also need to be informed of the
different funding opportunities that are available to them if they choose to adopt on-
site wastewater technologies
Promoting program participation through Strategic and Intelligent Outreach and
Education Partnerships where the custom incentive program will maximize outreach
efforts by educating decision makers and facilitate market acceptance through
existing relationships established from a wide food processor contact base including
food producers, processors, and integrators where promoting the understanding and
selling value proposition of the program can occur. SCE must strengthen this
customer base to draw interest and increase awareness.

ELIMINATING MARKET BARRIERS

Therefore, SCE must focus its attention on reducing and eliminating market barriers
by 1) leveraging data analytics, 2) understanding the specific criteria in targeting the
right candidate customer and 3) accounting for their respective drivers including
production, competitiveness and compliance with various regulations and
understanding the economics and associated financing strategies. By doing so, SCE
can then tailor its incentives and technical support to encourage this customer
segment in adopting onsite recycling and reuse wastewater systems by developing
new customer focused and innovative models and concepts and help serve its
customers’ energy and water need and support their desire to participate in a clean
energy future.

2
Accelerating Drought Resilience Through Innovative Technologies 2019, page 166.

Southern California Edison Page 29

Emerging Products August 2020
Wastewater Treatment and Process Water Recycling Systems ET18SCE7070

PROVIDING TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND TOOLS

Additionally, SCE should focus on providing applicable technical assistance and tools
that support the adoption of onsite recycling and reuse wastewater solutions. SCE is
currently refocusing its goals to consider GHG emissions reductions benefits into the
holistic cost-benefit analysis through the implementation of energy efficiency and
flexible demand response capable technologies and systems that also have the
capability to provide onsite generation and for certain applications. The deployment
of onsite water recycling and reuse systems will achieve a more comprehensive
approach in supporting SCE’s vision of a clean energy future. SCE has the
opportunity to gain significant traction with its customers by customizing technical
assistance and tools to each customer segment's unique needs by exploring
behavioral energy savings by collecting, quantifying, and translating i) smart interval
metered data, ii) benchmarking data, and iii) dynamic pricing data into relatable
valuation terms that are relatable to key decision makers.

LEVERAGING ALL APPLICABLE FINANCIAL SOLUTION

RESOURCES
As mentioned previously in the market barriers section of this white paper, the cost
for these technologies can push towards half a million or more. By introducing on-
site wastewater technologies, it can help replace conventional primary solutions such
as Dissolved Air Flotation (DAF), as well as a traditional aerobic and anaerobic
treatment systems. Most importantly, these new wastewater systems can help
eliminate the use of dairy lagoons, which are a driving factor for GHG emissions.
To help alleviate this significant financial barrier, SCE can also assist its customers by
leveraging all applicable financial solution resources including 1) traditional custom
energy efficiency incentives and rebates, 2) IDSM and/or non-resource utility
funding, 3) utility on-bill-financing and/or on-bill repayment 4) other utility and/or
grant funding mechanisms or 5) DR time of use rates and dynamic pricing (where
applicable).

Southern California Edison Page 30

Emerging Products August 2020
Wastewater Treatment and Process Water Recycling Systems ET18SCE7070

CONCLUSIONS
The wastewater ideas for both Agriculture and Municipal that are introduced in this white
paper can help California meet Senate Bill 350. California is expected to miss the 2030 goal
by about 44 percent, introducing these wastewater ideas would help close the gap towards
meeting the 2030 goal. Alongside the energy benefits, these wastewater ideas will help
reduce operation cost, maintenance cost, remove organics, and reduce GHG.

By educating the customers on the advantages of using on-site wastewater treatment, SCE
may see a higher adoption for these technologies. This includes education on how to find
the available grants and move forward in applying for them as well as understanding the
impact and dollar savings the customer will achieve by moving towards on-site wastewater
treatment.

Southern California Edison Page 31

Emerging Products August 2020
Wastewater Treatment and Process Water Recycling Systems ET18SCE7070

RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the findings of this paper, SCE should highly consider creating a new customized
solution code for onsite recycling and reuse wastewater technologies and systems as the
solution provides multiple benefits beyond energy efficiency savings. However, for the
proposed measure to succeed, the current cost-effectiveness energy efficiency framework
needs to be reconsidered to account for holistic benefits including but not limited to
reduction of GHG emissions, water use, energy use, and onsite water recycling and
generation. As SCE moves to a clean energy future, the onsite recycling and reuse
technology will create new ways of creating benefit streams for SCE customers all while
staying compliant with CPUC regulatory mandates.

This study recommends that pilot programs are initiated to test and prove out the holistic
benefits, so that the information gathered from the pilot can support future enhanced
incentive programs.

Southern California Edison Page 32

Emerging Products August 2020
Wastewater Treatment and Process Water Recycling Systems ET18SCE7070

REFERENCES
American Society of Civil Engineers. 2019. Report Card for California’s Infrastructure.
https://www.infrastructurereportcard.org/wp‐content/uploads/2018/10/FullReport‐CA_051019.pdf

Aviles, Claire, et al. 2017. Brewery Water and Process Water Management: The Golden, Green
Opportunity Found in Anaerobic Treatment Solutions.

Bauer, Diana, Mark Philbrick, Bob Vallario. 2014. The Water‐Energy Nexus: Challenges and
Opportunities. United States Department of Energy.
https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2014/07/f17/Water%20Energy%20Nexus%20Full%20Repo
rt%20July%202014.pdf

BioFiltro. 2020. www.biofiltro.com/home/

California Energy Commission staff. 2020. Final 2019 Integrated Energy Policy Report. California Energy
Commission. Publication Number: CEC‐100‐2019‐001‐CMF.

Caliskaner, Onder, Zoe Wu, Julia Lund, and Catrina Paez (Kennedy/Jenks Consultants). 2020. Raw
Wastewater Filtration to Reduce Secondary Treatment Electrical Energy Demand. California Energy
Commission. Publication Number: CEC‐500‐2020‐026

Cambrian Innovation. 2019. Sustainable Wastewater‐to‐Renewable Energy Solutions.

Carter, Nicole, Claudia Copeland. 2017. Energy‐Water Nexus: The Water Sector’s Energy Use.
Congressional Research Service. https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R43200

ClearCove. 2020. ClearCove ClearCapture Technology SCE Ideas Application.

ClearCove. Results from Pilot Testing of the ClearCapture: Fine and ClearCapture: Pure (with membrane
post processing) systems at Cheese Processing Facility PDF file.

ClearCove. Results from Pilot Testing of the ClearCapture: Fine and ClearCapture: Pure (with membrane
post processing) systems at a Milk Processing Facility PDF file.

Dairy Cares. https://www.dairycares.com/dairy‐

digesters#:~:text=Due%20mainly%20to%20the%20development,currently%20has%20127%20digest
er%20projects.

Dore, Sabina, et al. 2019. White Paper: The BioFiltro BIDA Wastewater Treatment System.

House, Lon W. 2007. Water Supply‐Related Electricity Demand in California. California Energy
Commission. Publication Number: CEC‐500‐2007‐114

Jones, Melissa, Michael Jaske, Michael Kenney, Brian Samuelson, Cynthia Rogers, Elena Giyenko, and
Manjit Ahuja. 2017. Senate Bill 350: Doubling Energy Efficiency Savings by 2030. California Energy
Commission. Publication Number: CEC‐400‐2017‐010‐CMF.

Southern California Edison Page 33

Emerging Products August 2020
Wastewater Treatment and Process Water Recycling Systems ET18SCE7070

Jones, Melissa, Michael Smith, Suzanne Korosec. 2005. Integrated Energy Policy Report. California
Energy Commission. Publication Number: CEC‐100‐2005‐007‐CMF

Kenney, Michael, Heather Bird, and Heriberto Rosales. 2019 California Energy Efficiency Action Plan.
California Energy Commission. Publication Number: CEC‐400‐2019‐010‐SF.

Malone, Michael. 2018. Oakview Dairy Treatment Improvement Proposal: Lagoon Nutrient Reduction.

Matheson, Rob. 2014. Brewing up Sustainability. MIT News Office.

http://energy.mit.edu/news/brewing‐up‐sustainability/.

Newman, S. 2014. Pacific Gas and Electric. ET14PGE1511 Biological Wastewater Treatment for Food
Processing Industry. San Francisco, California. Pacific Gas and Electric.

Pirne, Malcolm. 2008. Statewide Assessment of Energy Use by the Municipal Water and Wastewater
Sector. New York State Energy Research and Development Authority. Publication Number: NYSERDA
8672

Real California Milk. 2020. The California Dairy Press Room & Resources.
https://www.californiadairypressroom.com/Press_Kit/Dairy_Industry_Facts

See California. 2017. California Milk, Dairy, Cheese, Ice Cream Facts.
http://www.seecalifornia.com/farms/california‐milk.html

Southern California Edison. 2019. Pathway 2045: Update to the Clean Power and Electrification
Pathway. Rosemead, California. Southern California Edison.
https://www.edison.com/content/dam/eix/documents/our‐perspective/201911‐pathway‐to‐2045‐
white‐paper.pdf

Southern California Edison. 2020. Energy Management Solutions Water & Wastewater.
https://www.sce.com/sites/default/files/inline‐files/Water%2B‐
%2BWastewater%2BIS%2Br1_WCAG.pdf

United States Environmental Protection Agency. 2013. Energy Efficiency in Water and Wastewater
Facilities – A Guide to Developing and Implementing Greenhouse Gas Reduction Programs.
https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015‐08/documents/wastewater‐guide.pdf

United States Environmental Protection Agency. 2020. Energy Efficiency for Water Utilities.
https://www.epa.gov/sustainable‐water‐infrastructure/energy‐efficiency‐water‐utilities

We Think Global (WTG). 2019. WTG Cleantech technology pilot PPT

Wright, Alex, et al. 2015. ClearCove Organics Harvester Demonstration at the Ithaca Area Wastewater
Treatment Facility.

Zoldoske, David, et al. 2014. Biological Wastewater Treatment for Food Processing Industry.

Southern California Edison Page 34

Emerging Products August 2020