Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Feasibility of Aquifer Recharge Using Reclaimed Water in the Tampa Bay Area March 31, 2009. Phil Waller, P.E. SWUCA and MIA Recovery Strategy. Aquifer Recharge Concepts. Indirect Aquifer Recharge Rapid Infiltration Basin (RIB). Direct Aquifer Recharge Recharge Wells. Project Scope of Work. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
Feasibility of Aquifer Recharge Using Reclaimed Water in the Tampa Bay Area
March 31, 2009
Phil Waller, P.E.
SWUCA and MIA Recovery Strategy
Aquifer Recharge Concepts
Direct Aquifer RechargeRecharge Wells
Indirect Aquifer RechargeRapid Infiltration Basin
(RIB)
Project Scope of Work
• Task 1 – Similar Projects, Hydrogeology, Water Quality, and Permitting Summary
• Task 2 – Groundwater Modeling of indirect and direct aquifer recharge concepts
• Task 3 – Cost Analyses of selected recharge concepts
• Task 4 – Final Summary Report of findings
Similar Projects Review
Direct and Indirect Recharge CaliforniaGroundwater Replenishment System in Orange Co., CA
Similar Projects Review
RIBs in FloridaCommonly used for effluent disposalSecondary treatment requiredSome wetland polishing prior to RIBs
WATER CONSERVII – Orange Co. Florida
FDEP Reclaimed Water Treatment RequirementsD
iffic
ulty
Less
More
Ambient Aquifer Water Quality
Avon Park Formation TDS mg/L
> 3,000 mg/L
Filtration and HLDMeet Drinking Water
Standards
Ambient Aquifer Water Quality
Avon Park Formation TDS mg/L
< 3,000 mg/L> 500 mg/L
Multiple BarriersTOC / TOX
1 Year Pilot Test
Ambient Aquifer Water Quality
Avon Park Formation TDS mg/L
< 500 mg/L
Avon Park Formation TDS mg/L
Ambient Aquifer Water Quality
Multiple BarriersCarbon Absorption
TOC / TOXMutagenecity Testing2 Year Full Scale Test
SWFWMD Permitting
• No new groundwater level impacts to the MIA.
• Minimum flows and levels established for priority water bodies in the SWUCA.
• Net benefit in the SWUCA must be demonstrated.
Indirect Aquifer Recharge Concepts Areas
Area 2 – Moderate connection to UFA Lakeland Area
Area 3 – Minimal connection to UFA Engineering Enhancements
Area 1 – High connection to UFA Lake Wales Ridge Area
Change in water level in the Upper Floridan AquiferDrawdown (ft)
Area 1 Indirect Recharge Model Simulation
4 MGD Withdrawal Only From Avon Park Formation
Area 1 Indirect Recharge Model Simulation
5 MGD Recharge and 4 MGD Withdrawal From Avon Park Formation
Change in water level in the Upper Floridan AquiferDrawdown (ft) Mounding (ft)
Modeled Direct Aquifer Recharge Areas
20 MGD Recharge Only Model Simulations
Area 5 Water Level Improvements MIA PR
Area 1 Middle +1.99 ft +0.33 ft
Area 2 South +2.10 ft +0.60 ftArea 3 South +1.77 ft +0.75 ft
Direct Aquifer Recharge Modeled Withdrawal Areas
Coastal (Area 1) Direct Aquifer Recharge
20 MGD Recharge with 15 MGD Withdrawal Response Summary
Inland (Area 2) Direct Aquifer Recharge 20 MGD Recharge with 15 MGD Withdrawal Response Summary
Area 3SMIA= +0.73 feetPR= +0.02 feet
Inland (Area 2) Direct Aquifer Recharge
20 MGD Recharge with 15 MGD Withdrawal Response Summary
Combination Configurations Selected for Costing
Indirect Recharge Configuration
WWTF
5-Mile Long Pipeline
2 Withdrawal Wells
5-Mile Long Pipeline
5 MGD, 500 ACRE, 4 RIB Site
1-mile distance
Chloramination
Pump Station
Indirect Recharge 5 MGD AADF Withdrawal 4 MGD AADF
Coastal Direct Recharge Configuration
Advanced WWTF UV
Storage Tank
Direct Recharge 20 MGD AADF Withdrawal 15 MGD AADF
10-Mile Long Pipeline
Chloramination
Future Facilities Located at AWWTP
(10-acre footprint)
Cl2-
16 Recharge Wells 24 Monitor Wells 890 acres
15-Mile Pipeline
UV Vacuum DO
Removal
8 Withdrawal Wells (1-acre per well)
Pump Station
Inland Direct Recharge Configuration
Advanced WWTF
Pump Station
AOP/UV
Direct Recharge 20 MGD AADF
Future Facilities Located at AWWTP
(20-acre footprint)
Withdrawal 15 MGD AADF
10-Mile Long Pipeline
Cl2-
RO
MF
Chloramination
20-Mile PipelineUV Vacuum DO
Removal
8 Withdrawal Wells (1-acre per well)
Storage Tank
16 Recharge Wells 24 Monitor Wells 890 acres
Estimated 2009 Recharge Concept Costs
Recharge Rate
(AADF in MGD)
Withdrawal Rate
(AADF in MGD)
Total Recharge
and Withdrawal
Capital Costs
(Million $)
AnnualO & M
andCapital Costs
(Million $)
Total Production
Cost $/1,000 Gallons
Indirect Aquifer Recharge Areas 1 & 25 4 $51.9 $6.4 $4.36
Indirect Aquifer Recharge Area 35 4 $64.8 $7.6 $5.19
Direct Aquifer Recharge Area 1 Middle10 9 $134.2 $12.6 $3.8520 5 & 10 $250.9 $23.8 $4.3420 15 $230.0 $22.1 $4.0520 9 & 9 $248.7 $23.7 $3.6120 18 $237.4 $22.8 $3.47
Direct Aquifer Recharge Area 2 South10 9 $224.3 $22.6 $6.1820 5 & 10 $422.3 $42.9 $7.8420 15 $401.3 $41.3 $7.5420 9 & 9 $420.0 $42.9 $6.5320 18 $408.7 $41.9 $6.38
Recharge Concept SummaryRecharge Type Capital Costs
($ Million)Production Costs
($/1,000 gal) Risk Issues
Rapid Infiltration Basins1 $52M $4.30 Low
•Land intensive•Common to Florida•Minimal MIA water level improvement
RIBs with Engineered Enhancements2 $65M $5.20 High
•Land intensive•Minimal MIA water level improvement•Connector wells difficult to permit
Coastal Direct Recharge3 $230M $4.00 Medium •Metals mobilization
Inland Direct Recharge4 $420M $7.50 High
•Metals mobilization•Supplemental treatment•Full-scale testing
15 MGD Recharge and 4 MGD Withdrawal25 MGD Recharge and 4 MGD Withdrawal320 MGD Recharge and 15 MGD Withdrawal420 MGD Recharge and 15 MGD Withdrawal
Feasibility of Aquifer Recharge Using Reclaimed Water in the Tampa Bay Area
The End
Phil Waller, P.E.
Phil Waller, P.E.
