Water and Waste Management Systems - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Loading...

PPT – Water and Waste Management Systems PowerPoint presentation | free to view - id: 4a044f-YWExN



Loading


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation
Title:

Water and Waste Management Systems

Description:

Water and Waste Management Systems for Stanford University s Green Dorm Final Design Presentation Client: Dr. Sandy Robertson, Stanford Green Dorm – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:1106
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 45
Provided by: CH496
Category:

less

Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Water and Waste Management Systems


1
Water and Waste Management Systems for Stanford
Universitys Green Dorm
Final Design Presentation
Client Dr. Sandy Robertson, Stanford Green Dorm
LCC Design, Inc.
Christine George Charlotte Helvestine Leah
Yelverton
Friday, June 8, 2007
2
Organization
  • I. Project Goals and Organization
  • II. Final Design Schematic
  • III. Water Balance
  • IV. Regulations
  • V. Greywater System
  • VI. Blackwater System
  • VII. Green Roof and Rainwater Harvesting
  • VIII. Conclusions Living Laboratory

3
I. Project Goals and Organization
4
Design Goals
  • Provide plans for a water and waste management
    system that meets the public demand
  • Minimize (1) the environmental impacts of the
    building, and (2) the net usage of water by
    outlining methods for water treatment and reuse
  • Maximize (1) the opportunities for research and
    education, and (2) user health, safety, and
    satisfaction
  • Greywater Reuse System
  • Blackwater System
  • Green Roof and Rainwater Harvesting

Proposed Technologies
5
Proposed Approach
Initial Water Balance
(Entire LCC Design team)
Greywater Reuse System
Blackwater System
Green Roof and Rainwater Harvesting
(Christine George)
(Leah Yelverton)
(Charlotte Helvestine)
For each system, each individual will 1.
Determine regulations/restrictions, 2. Explore
design options, 3. Assess environmental impacts
of green approach vs. traditional technologies,
4. Explore operation/maintenance requirements of
system
Final Adjusted Water Balance
(Entire LCC Design team)
Comparison to initial design goals
6
II. Final Design Schematic
7
(No Transcript)
8
III. Water Balance
9
Base Data American Water Works Association
Residential End Use Survey JBM Stanford-Specific
Adjustments - modified Toilet Flow to reflect
1.5 gpf toilets - combined Bath and Shower
use - separated Kitchen Faucet from Bathroom
Faucet LCC Adjustments - Stanford Water Use
Survey toilet flushes and laundry loads -
Laundry and Toilet technologies
LCC Design Modifications
  JBM Water Balance JBM Water Balance LCC Water Balance LCC Water Balance
Altered Categories Appliance Usage Personal Usage Appliance Usage Personal Usage
Toilets 1.5 gal/flush 5.05 flushes/day 0.03 - 0.13 gal/flush1,2 6.5 flushes/day3
Laundry 40 gal/load 2.6 loads/week 25 gal/load4 1.1 loads/week3
Inhabitants 55 55 47 47
1SeaLand Microflush Toilet 2Wost Man Ecology EB
Dual-Flush Urine-Diverting Toilet 3CEE 179C
Stanford Water Use Survey 4 New York City
Council. Water Conservation Plan Facts. 2002.
Available Online lthttp//www.nyccouncil.info/pdf_
files/reports/waterfacts.pdfgt Accessed 3 June
2007.
10
LCC Final Water Balance
JBM LCC Water Balance LCC Water Balance
Source Category Item Flow (gpcd) Flow (gpcd) Flow (gal/day) End Category
potable Dishwashers 1.0 1.0 50 black
potable Other Domestic 1.6 1.6 80 n/a
potable, grey Leaks 2.7 2.7 130 n/a
potable Faucet - Kitchen 6.7 6.7 310 black
potable Faucet - Bathroom 4.2 4.2 200 grey
potable Shower 12.8 12.8 600 grey
grey Clothes Washers 15 3.9 180 grey
grey Toilets - Low-Flow 1.5 gpf 7.6 9.8 460 black
grey Toilets - Urine-Diverting ------- 1.7 80 black
grey Toilets - Composting ------- 0.8 40 black
Total 52 34 - 43 1600 - 2000
11
IV. Regulations
12
Greywater Regulations
  • Requires Tertiary Treatment Level
  • Toilet Flushing
  • Laundry Reuse
  • Subsurface Irrigations
  • Filtration size 115 microns
  • A minimum of 6 inches of soil cover over the
    dispersal system
  • Closed loop distribution lines, periodic flushing
  • All distribution lines should be the color purple
    to identify it as a non-potable water
  • Issued operation permit

13
V. Greywater System
14
Greywater Design Overview
  • Benefits of Greywater System
  • Reduce Water Potable Usage
  • Reduce Ecological Footprint
  • Proposed Designs
  • Subsurface Irrigation
  • Toilet Flushing/Laundry Reuse

15
Subsurface Irrigation
  • Irrigation Treatment Design
  • Gravity tank and a backwashing sand filter
  • Filter size 115 microns
  • Advantages
  • Removal of heavy and floating particles1
  • Pathogen reduction1

Automatic Greywater Filtration System for
Subsurface Irrigation
1. O.R. Al-Jayyousi, Greywater reuse towards
sustainable water management, Desalination
156(2003) 181-192
16
Equaris System
  • Equaris Total Household Water Recycling and
    Wastewater Treatment System
  • Biological treatment, membrane filters and UV
    disinfection1
  • Provides tertiary level water treatment2
  • Capacity 1500 gpd, 3 systems2
  • Cost 75,000 dollars plus installation cost3
  • Footprint 120 cubic feet1

Equaris Total Household Water Recycling and
Wastewater Treatment1
  • 1 Equaris Corporation. Water Recycling System.
    lthttp//www.equaris.com/default.asp?PageDisinfect
    iongt
  • 2 Elston, Clint. Todays Fuel Cell and Cell Phone
    of Water and Wastewater Treatment.
    lthttp//www.equaris.com/ppt/05-0605AWRAPaperwithCa
    ptions.pdfgt
  • 3 Equaris Corporation. Price List.
    lthttp//www.equaris.com/default.asp?PagePriceList
    gt

17
Z-MOD S
  • Z-MOD S
  • Packaged Treatment System1
  • ZeeWeed MBR
  • UV disinfection
  • Capacity 2900 gpd1
  • Provides tertiary level water treatment
  • Footprint 845 square feet1

Z-MOD S Below Ground Packaged Plant2
1 Zenon Membrane Solutions. GE Water and Process
Technologies. The Earth Rangers Centre.
lthttp//www.zenon.com/PDF/Case20Studies/Products/
Packaged20Plants/Z-MOD/Z-MOD20S/ZMOD20S20Earth
20Rangers 20Case20Study.pdfgt 2 Zenon Membrane
Solutions. GE Water and Process Technologies.
Z-MOD S Below Ground Packaged Plant
Specifications. lthttp//www.zenon.com/products/pac
kaged_systems/Z-MOD/Z-MOD_type_s_below_ground.shtm
lgt
18
Aqua Reviva
  • Aqua Reviva
  • Packaged treatment option 1
  • Steel control box
  • Biological treatment in treatment cell
  • Cost 90,000-135,000 dollars2
  • Capacity 1665 gallons/day, 9 systems3
  • Footprint142 square4

Treatment System and Control Box 4
1 Aqua Reviva. Product Specifications.
lthttp//www.aquareviva.com.au/product_info.aspgt 2
Aqua Reviva. Prices. lthttp//www.aquareviva.com.au
/prices.aspgt 3 Aqua Reviva. How It Works.
lthttp//www.aquareviva.com.au/how_it_works.aspgt 4
Aqua Reviva. Photos and Diagrams.
lthttp//www.aquareviva.com.au/photos.aspgt
19
Design Comparison
Criteria Equaris8,9 Z-MOD S2 Aqua Reviva5
Water Quality      
BOD5 ---- lt 2 mg/L10 lt 10 mg/L
TSS ---- lt 0.2 mg/L9 lt 10 mg/L
NH3 ---- lt 0.2 mg/L9 -----
P ---- lt0.015 MG/L9 -----
Total Coliform lt1 MPN/100 ml ----- -----
Fecal Coliform lt1 MPN/100 ml ----- lt10 Faecal Coliforms /100ml
Disinfection Included Yes, UV Disinfection Yes, UV Disinfection9 Yes, modal contact time of 30 minutes (but US standards require at least 90 minutes)
Foot Print      
Capacity (gal/day) 500 gal/day per system8, 1500 gal/day (3 systems) 2,900 gallons10 185 gal/day per system, 1670 gal/day 9 systems
Volume (cubic ft) 40 ft3 per system, 120 ft3 for 3 systems 845 square feet9 16 ft3 per system, 142 ft3 for 9 systems (treatment system and control box)
Cost () 75,000 plus the cost of installation ---- 90,000-135,000
20
Design Comparison References
1 Equaris Corporation. www.equaris.com 1 Equaris Corporation. www.equaris.com 1 Equaris Corporation. www.equaris.com
2 GE Water Process Technologies. Southern California SeaWater Desalination Project. www.zenonenv.com
3 Residence time for MBR taken from L. Defrance, Contribution of various constituents of activated sludge to membrane bioreactor fouling, Bioresource Technology Volume 73(2) June 2000 105-112 3 Residence time for MBR taken from L. Defrance, Contribution of various constituents of activated sludge to membrane bioreactor fouling, Bioresource Technology Volume 73(2) June 2000 105-112 3 Residence time for MBR taken from L. Defrance, Contribution of various constituents of activated sludge to membrane bioreactor fouling, Bioresource Technology Volume 73(2) June 2000 105-112 3 Residence time for MBR taken from L. Defrance, Contribution of various constituents of activated sludge to membrane bioreactor fouling, Bioresource Technology Volume 73(2) June 2000 105-112
4 Taken from JBM Associates, Stanford Universitys Green Dorm Water System Management Project, section 3.4.3 (June 2005) 4 Taken from JBM Associates, Stanford Universitys Green Dorm Water System Management Project, section 3.4.3 (June 2005) 4 Taken from JBM Associates, Stanford Universitys Green Dorm Water System Management Project, section 3.4.3 (June 2005)
5 Aqua Reviva. www.aquareviva.com.au
6 GE Water Process Technologies. Zenon Membrane Solutions. http//www.zenonenv.com/newsroom/articles/2006/10/earth_rangers.shtml 6 GE Water Process Technologies. Zenon Membrane Solutions. http//www.zenonenv.com/newsroom/articles/2006/10/earth_rangers.shtml
7 Taken from JBM Associates, Stanford Universitys Green Dorm Water System Management Project, section 3.4.3 3.4.3 Comparison of Two Systems (June 2005) 7 Taken from JBM Associates, Stanford Universitys Green Dorm Water System Management Project, section 3.4.3 3.4.3 Comparison of Two Systems (June 2005) 7 Taken from JBM Associates, Stanford Universitys Green Dorm Water System Management Project, section 3.4.3 3.4.3 Comparison of Two Systems (June 2005) 7 Taken from JBM Associates, Stanford Universitys Green Dorm Water System Management Project, section 3.4.3 3.4.3 Comparison of Two Systems (June 2005)
8 Equaris Corporation. Water Recycling System. http//www.equaris.com/default.asp?PageDisinfection 8 Equaris Corporation. Water Recycling System. http//www.equaris.com/default.asp?PageDisinfection
9 Zenon Membrane Solutions. GE Water and Process Technologies. The Earth Rangers Centre. lthttp//www.zenon.com/PDF/Case20Studies/Products/Packaged20Plants/Z-MOD/Z-MOD20S/ZMOD20S20Earth20Rangers 20Case20Study.pdfgt 9 Zenon Membrane Solutions. GE Water and Process Technologies. The Earth Rangers Centre. lthttp//www.zenon.com/PDF/Case20Studies/Products/Packaged20Plants/Z-MOD/Z-MOD20S/ZMOD20S20Earth20Rangers 20Case20Study.pdfgt 9 Zenon Membrane Solutions. GE Water and Process Technologies. The Earth Rangers Centre. lthttp//www.zenon.com/PDF/Case20Studies/Products/Packaged20Plants/Z-MOD/Z-MOD20S/ZMOD20S20Earth20Rangers 20Case20Study.pdfgt 9 Zenon Membrane Solutions. GE Water and Process Technologies. The Earth Rangers Centre. lthttp//www.zenon.com/PDF/Case20Studies/Products/Packaged20Plants/Z-MOD/Z-MOD20S/ZMOD20S20Earth20Rangers 20Case20Study.pdfgt
10 GE Water Process Technologies. Zenon Membrane Solutions World Headquarters and Assembly Plant. http//www.zenon.com/pdf/case20studies/products/packaged20plants/z-mod/z-mod20s/z-mod20s20zenon20hq20case20study.pdf 10 GE Water Process Technologies. Zenon Membrane Solutions World Headquarters and Assembly Plant. http//www.zenon.com/pdf/case20studies/products/packaged20plants/z-mod/z-mod20s/z-mod20s20zenon20hq20case20study.pdf 10 GE Water Process Technologies. Zenon Membrane Solutions World Headquarters and Assembly Plant. http//www.zenon.com/pdf/case20studies/products/packaged20plants/z-mod/z-mod20s/z-mod20s20zenon20hq20case20study.pdf 10 GE Water Process Technologies. Zenon Membrane Solutions World Headquarters and Assembly Plant. http//www.zenon.com/pdf/case20studies/products/packaged20plants/z-mod/z-mod20s/z-mod20s20zenon20hq20case20study.pdf
21
VI. Blackwater System
22
What is Blackwater?
23
Blackwater an untapped resource
Nutrients
Energy
24
Nutrient content of human waste
Nutrients produced by one person in one day.
Nutrient (g/ppd) Urine Feces Total
Nitrogen 11 1.6 12
Phosphorus 1 0.5 1.5
Potassium 2.2 0.8 2.9
BOD5 7.5 11 18.5
COD 15 33 48
TS 65 44 109
Swedish EPA. 1995b. What does household
wastewater contain? Report 4425, Swedish
Environmental Protection Agency, Stockholm,
Sweden. Ligman, K., Hutzler, N. and Boyle, W.
Household Wastewater Characterization. Journal
of the Environmental Engineering Division. Feb
1974. Jonsson, H., Stenstrom, T-A., Svensson, J.,
and Sundin, A. Source separated urine
nutrient and heavy metal content, water saving
and faecal contamination. Wat Sci and
Tech. 35(9) pp. 145-152. Del Porto, D. and
Seinfeld, C. The Composting Toilet System Book.
Center for Ecological Pollution Prevention.
Massachusetts, USA. 2000. Henze, M. Waste
design for households with respect to water,
organics and nutrients. Wat Sci and Tech. 35(9)
pp. 113-120
25
Energy potential of human waste
C6 H12 O6
3 CH4
3 CO2

0.35 liters CH4 / g COD
Based on correspondence with Sara Marks and Sandy
Robertson.
26
Technologies Considered
Urine-diverting Toilet
Composting Toilet
Anaerobic Digester and MBR
27
Scenario 1 Business as usual
  End location (g/ppd) End location (g/ppd) End location (g/ppd)
Nutrient Sewer Urine Storage Compost
N 12    
P 1.5    
K 2.9    
BOD5 18.5    
COD 48    
TS 109    
Inflow volume 37 L / ppd
Discharge vol. 38 L / ppd
CH4 potential 17 L / ppd
28
Scenario 2 Urine-diverting toilets
  End location (g/ppd) End location (g/ppd) End location (g/ppd)
Nutrient Sewer Urine Storage Compost
N 1.6 11 (92)  
P 0.5 1 (67)  
K 0.8 2.2 (76)  
BOD5 11 7.5 (40)  
COD 33 15 (31)  
TS 44 65 (60)  
Discharge volume 6 L / ppd
CH4 potential 12 L / ppd
Inflow volume 6.4 L / ppd
Urine storage vol. 2 L / ppd
29
Scenario 3 Composting toilets
Compost to Garden
Micro-flush Toilet
Composter
Source
Leachate to Sewer
  End location (g/ppd) End location (g/ppd) End location (g/ppd)
Nutrient Sewer Urine Storage Compost
N 0.09   12 (100)
P 0.06   1.4 (93)
K -   -
BOD5 -   -
COD 0.5   47 (98)
TS 0.1   109 (100)
Inflow volume 3 L / ppd
Discharge volume 4 L / ppd
CH4 potential 0.2 L / ppd
Based on leachate nutrient estimates from one
study. Lee, T., K. Crawford, and T. Hill.
Analysis of Monitoring Results of the Separation
and Graywater Treatment System at Chester Woods
Park, Olmsted County, Minn. Olmsted County
Water Resources Center. Rochester, MN.
30
Comparison of Scenarios
  Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3
N capture 0 92 100
P capture 0 67 93
Inflow vol (L) 37 6 3
Discharge vol (L) 38 6 4
CH4 potential (L) 17 12 0.2
These numbers have a high degree of error and do
not include nutrient losses.
31
The 4th Scenario?
  • optimizing choice of urine-diverting and
    composting toilets
  • Value of urine and compost
  • Value of natural gas
  • Research opportunities

32
Picture Sources
  • Kitchen sink http//www.inmagine.com/house-proud
    -photos/digitalvision-dv812
  • Toilet http//www.ci.austin.tx.us/watercon/image
    s/ASChampionSkyline.jpg
  • Sewage http//www.oceannet.org/medag/images/sewa
    ge_pipe.jpg
  • Tree http//www.ci.austin.tx.us/watercon/images/
    ASChampionSkyline.jpg
  • Gas http//picturethis.pnl.gov/PictureT.nsf/All/
    4VXNUE?opendocument
  • Bacteria http//www.sdnhm.org/exhibits/epidemic/
    naturalhistory.html
  • Anaerobic digester http//pasture.ecn.purdue.edu
    /jiqin/PhotoDigester/Digester1.jpg

33
VII. Green Roof and Rainwater Harvesting
34
  • Goals of the Stanford Green Roof and Rainwater
    Harvesting System
  • Reduced Stormwater Runoff
  • Rainwater Capture and Reuse
  • Thermal Benefits
  • Research Opportunities

Cross-section of Green Roof
Extensive Green Roof in North Carolina
Bass, Brad and Bas Baskaran. Evaluating Rooftop
and Vertical Gardens as an Adaptation Strategy
for Urban Areas. National Research Council
Canada and Institute for Research in
Construction. 2003.
Amy Christine. A North Carolina Field Study to
Evaluate Green Roof Runoff Quantity, Runoff
Quality, and Plant Growth. North Carolina State
University, 2004.
35
Stormwater Retention
  • Benefits1
  • Lower discharge volumes to sewer
  • Lower risk of combined-sewer overflow (CSO)
  • Expected Stormwater Retention
  • Compare to observed stormwater retention
  • Range of 55-70 annual retention2-4
  • Mass-Balance modeling
  • Evapotranspiration Runoff Precipitation
  • Crop Coefficients5 ETc EToKc
  • 0.6 for intensive (warm-season turf), 0.25 for
    extensive (sedum groundcover)6

1U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Combined
Sewer Overflows. lt http//cfpub.epa.gov/npdes/home
.cfm?program_id5gt 2Moran, Amy Christine. A
North Carolina Field Study to Evaluate Green Roof
Runoff Quantity, Runoff Quality, and Plant
Growth. North Carolina State University, 2004.
3Hutchinson, Doug et al. Stormwater Monitoring
Two Ecoroofs in Portland, Oregon, USA. City of
Portland, Bureau of Environmental Services.
2003. 4VanWoert, Nicholaus D. et al. Green Roof
Stormwater Retention Effects of Roof Surface,
Slope, and Media Depth. Journal of Environmental
Quality. 34, pg. 1036-1044. 2005. 5California
Irrigation Management Information System. ET
Overview. 2005. lt http//www.cimis.water.ca.gov/ci
mis/infoEtoOverview.jspgt 6California Department
of Water Resources. A Guide to Estimating
Irrigation Water Needs of Landscape Plantings in
California. 2000. lthttp//www.owue.water.ca.gov/do
cs/wucols00.pdfgt
36
Stormwater Retention
Estimated runoff and retention from the different
roofs.
37
Rainwater Capture and Reuse
  • Benefits
  • Reduced demand of potable water
  • Reduced stormwater runoff
  • Quality Concerns
  • Green Roof Runoff
  • Substrate acts as sink for heavy metals1
  • Compost can increase concentrations of N and P,
    which can lead to algae blooms and
    contamination1-3
  • Reference Roof Runoff
  • Dissolved chemicals from roof material,
    atmospherically deposited microbes and chemicals4
  • Treatment minimum gravitational settling and
    mechanical filtration4

1Berndtsson, Justyna Czemiel et al. The Influence
of Extensive Vegetated Roofs on Runoff Water
Quality. Science of the Total Environment, Vol.
355 pg. 48-63. 2006. 2Hutchinson, Doug et al.
Stormwater Monitoring Two Ecoroofs in Portland,
Oregon, USA. City of Portland, Bureau of
Environmental Services. 2003. 3Meera, V. et al.
Water Quality of Rooftop Rainwater Harvesting
Systems A Review. Journal of Water Supply
Research and Technology AQUA. 55.4, pg.
257-268. 2006. 4Texas Water Development Board and
Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems.
Texas Guide to Rainwater Harvesting, Second
Edition. 1997.
38
Rainwater Capture and Reuse
Example green roof layout, based on Feasibility
Study sketch1.
1EHDD Architecture and Stanford Department of
Civil and Environmental Engineering. Green Dorm
Feasibility Study. 2006. lthttp//www.stanford.edu/
group/greendorm/ greendorm/feasibility_study.htmlgt
39
Rainwater Capture and Reuse
Suggested Flows of Harvested Rainwater
  • 65,000 gallons available annually (20 losses
    through leaks, filtration, treatment1)
  • 15,000-gallon tank to store dry season green roof
    irrigation demand2
  • 50,000 gallons available (Oct-April) for toilet
    flushing, washing machines, and additional
    irrigation

1Texas Water Development Board and Center for
Maximum Potential Building Systems. Texas Guide
to Rainwater Harvesting, Second Edition. 1997.
2Rana Creek Living Architecture. Designing the
California Academy of Sciences Living Roof An
Ecological Approach. 2005. lthttp//www1.eere.energ
y.gov/femp/energy_expo /2005/pdfs/t_s7a.pdfgt
40
Thermal Benefits
  • Benefits1-3
  • Reduced Roof Temperature
  • Reduces urban heat island effect and indoor
    temperature
  • Extends lifetime of roof
  • Reduced Heat Flux
  • Reduces space-conditioning energy demand
  • Estimated Heat Flux
  • Heat flow through insulation4 q ?T/R
  • q is the heat transfer (Btu/hr-ft2), ?T is the
    difference between the outdoor and indoor
    temperatures, and R is the insulation value of
    the green roof (hr-ft2-ºF/Btu)
  • Assume indoor temp of 70F, average monthly
    maximum outdoor temperatures5, substrate
    insulation of R-3/inch6

1Bass, Brad et al. Evaluating Rooftop and
Vertical Gardens as an Adaptation Strategy for
Urban Areas. National Research Council Canada.
2003. 2United States Environmental Protection
Agency. Vegetated Roof Cover Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania. EPA Office of Water, Low-Impact
Development Center. October 2000. 3Sonne, Jeff.
Evaluating Green Roof Energy Performance. ASHRAE
Journal. February 2006. 4Gil Masters. CEE 176A
Energy Efficient Buildings. Course Notes. 7 Jan
2007. 5California Irrigation Management
Information System. Monthly Station 132.
http//wwwcimis.water.ca.gov/cimis/logon.do?forwar
dURL/frontMonthlyReportselTabdata 6Peck,
Steven and Monica Kuhn. Design Guidelines for
Green Roofs. Sponsored by Canada Mortgage and
Housing Corporation, Ontario Association of
Architects.
41
Thermal Benefits
Estimated heat flux through the Stanford green
roof for varying substrate depths during warm
months.
  • Compare to reference roof heat flux of 2.1-2.8
    Btu/hr-ft2 (1,2)

1Bass, Brad et al. Evaluating Rooftop and
Vertical Gardens as an Adaptation Strategy for
Urban Areas. National Research Council Canada.
2003. 2Sonne, Jeff. Evaluating Green Roof Energy
Performance. ASHRAE Journal. February 2006.
42
VIII. Conclusions Living Laboratory
43
Living Laboratory Research for the Future
  • Promote and refine water recycling technologies
  • Greywater
  • Monitor the quality of greywater as it changes
    over time
  • Experiment with different treatment technologies
    and their effects on quality
  • Blackwater
  • Explore waste as a resource.
  • Experimental systems provide ample opportunity
    for research of blackwater treatment and reuse.
  • Green Roof and Rainwater Harvesting
  • Test different vegetation and substrate
    materials/depths for their effects on stormwater
    retention, runoff quality, and thermal insulation
  • Experiment with blackwater-derived compost
  • Publicize sustainable water management for
    campuses and buildings worldwide

44
Questions?
About PowerShow.com