My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2003-063
CBCC
>
Official Documents
>
2000's
>
2003
>
2003-063
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/28/2016 9:33:35 AM
Creation date
9/30/2015 6:25:21 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Official Documents
Official Document Type
Report
Approved Date
03/11/2003
Control Number
2003-063
Agenda Item Number
11.H.1.
Entity Name
PBS & J
Subject
February 2003, IRC Central Wastewater Treatment Facility Odor Control St
Archived Roll/Disk#
3160
Supplemental fields
SmeadsoftID
3185
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
73
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
ODOR CONTROL STUDY <br /> 4 . 1 Model Limitations <br /> The results of this model should be considered an illustrative tool and a relative <br /> indicator of off-site odor impacts . Various assumptions were not included in this model , <br /> including building effects , terrain of the surrounding area , etc. In addition , the model was <br /> developed for worst case conditions and does not account for days without detectable <br /> wind speed . Therefore , the results should not be used as an absolute indication of off. <br /> site sulfide concentrations . Instead , the model results offer evidence of the potential <br /> effectiveness of alternative control measures . <br /> 4.2 Odor Detection Thresholds <br /> The thresholds for odorous sulfide compounds vary depending on the compound , the <br /> source , and the sensitivity of the receptors . Although much of the data is subjective , <br /> receptor recognition of H2S and organic sulfur compounds is generally about 1 ppbv. <br /> Significant research has been performed to estimate detection and complaint thresholds <br /> for H2S . Figure 13 depicts the odor threshold sensitivity for H2S . This figure shows the <br /> " Odor Impact Model " developed by the Ontario Ministry of the Environment and <br /> published in the WEF Manual of Practice No . 22 , Odor Control in Wastewater <br /> Treatment Facilities . The three curves shown in the figure show human responses to <br /> certain concentrations of H2S . The detection curve indicates the percentage of the <br /> panelists that could detect an odor that is faint, but unrecognizable . The complaint and <br /> annoyance curves reflect the percentage of panelists that might register a complaint or <br /> become annoyed by the specific concentration of H2-S . Other references -cite odor <br /> recognition threshold values , which are in between the detection and complaint curves . <br /> Odor recognition is when someone can detect an odor and recognize the character of <br /> the odor. Even though the H2S model may be more qualitative than quantitative , it <br /> shows that almost no panel members detected H2S at- a concentration below 1 ppbv. <br /> Similar response levels are expected for organic sulfur compounds such as dimethyl <br /> sulfide , mercaptans , and other organic sulfur compounds . Thus , 1 ppbv of H2S is <br /> considered a reasonable worse case odor detection threshold and 5 ppbv is considered <br /> a reasonable odor recognition threshold . The dispersion model was therefore calibrated <br /> to identify the location of these concentrations under worse case meteorological <br /> conditions . <br /> To visualize and prioritize potential odor control improvements , separate models were <br /> developed for several different improvement options . These options correspond to the <br /> improvements discussed above . Conservative control efficiencies were assumed for the <br /> major odor sources based on efficiencies generally achieved with installation of odor <br /> control measures. The conceptual improvements proposed and the potential reduction <br /> of odor emissions for each of the options are provided below: <br /> Existing Conditions with Filtrate Equalization Basin Emissions (Figure 14) <br /> and Aerobic Digester Emissions (April 2002) <br /> •J 24 Indian River County, Central Wastewater Treatment Facility <br /> 1 PBS&J #071230, February 2003 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.