Contact
Phone: 860.444.0866
Fax:     860.444.0896
email
111 Huntington Street
New London, CT 06320

Bacteria Have Rights Too!

I’m an animal lover. Plants, too.

My children were raised in something of a zoo. In addition to dogs and cats, we had rabbits, ducks, chickens, guinea fowl and turkeys. We had millipedes, hissing cockroaches, salamanders and newts. We bottle fed an abandoned raccoon before returning him to the wild. Our collection of fish, sea monkeys, and turtles included a small snapper my daughter named “fluffy.” We had a chinchilla, a hedgehog and ferrets. Snakes, hamsters and guinea pigs. And, then there was that pair of nasty geckos that only my son would handle – with leather gloves.

Of the many dogs in my life, I most fondly remember Queenie and Zeb. Queenie, a Llewellyn Setter was a great childhood pet and an equally marvelous hunting dog, bobwhite quail being her specialty. Zeb was as devoted of a companion as anyone could ever want. Once, after getting into it with a porcupine, he trustfully looked into my eyes as I extracted dozens of barbed quills from his mouth. With pliers. His pain was unbelievable, his trust stronger. Something I’ll never forget.

As much as I like animals, members of my species are more important to me. Given the choice, I’ll sacrifice wildlife for human welfare. Any day. This puts me at odds with many in the environmental movement. It is where we part ways.

Take Switzerland, for example. Residents are no longer allowed to flush sick aquarium fish down the toilet. Unless, that is, they are first euthanized with a “sharp blow to the head, or immersed in water mixed with clove oil dissolved in alcohol.” The country’s animal lawyer, Antoine Goetschel, is suing a sports fisherman who landed a 22 pound pike for taking too long to reel in the fish: cruel behavior, or some such allegation.

This is relevant information.

Before we in the wastewater biz find ourselves on the wrong side of political correctness, we need to work on our terminology. We need to come up with a new way to refer to “wasting sludge.” Sludge, after all, is mostly bacteria – living creatures. Sounds pretty cruel to so casually discuss the death of so many little organisms, don’t you think? Before someone re-labels our work “genocide,” somebody needs to form a committee and give us a new name. Something like “bio-solids recycling.”

I’m suggesting we take the offensive because it will only be a matter of time before Attorney Goetschel and his ilk find out that wastewater professionals use chlorine to KILL filamentous bacteria. If word of this gets out, we’ll be required to establish pre-death chambers with soothing music and nice art work. Or, some such thing.

How about this for a pro-active idea: let’s form a committee to figure out how we perform the proper forensics on aquarium fish that get flushed. I’m thinking we can check them for head blows or traces of clove oil and alcohol. Little fishes that don’t show signs of either can then be delivered to the police for follow-up investigation. Call it our way of stopping animal cruelty.

Okay, I’m kidding. But really!

When, my friends, will the nonsense stop?

Thanks for reading.

Grant

Bad Science

Last week I sat quietly while a design engineer lectured a client about my company’s “bad science.” He became so rabid during the two hour rant, I offered to get him a soda. Not because I was in any way empathetic. The spittle on his lip was grossing me out. Sadly, he declined the offer of drink and I withstood a two-fronted assault: verbal and visual.

Charlatans exist. I just read about a fellow in Russia who claims to have invented a device that supposedly makes drinking water out of radioactive waste. In the spirit of creating jobs in the Soviet down economy, I suppose, United Russia, the nation’s ruling party, has invested millions of rubles in the former convict’s “inventions.”

A healthy skepticism is a good defensive mechanism. In my circumstance, the engineer was outraged at my ability to work with an intelligent client to make the treatment plant he designed produce an effluent three times cleaner than his mathematical model said possible: 1.2 mg/L total-nitrogen. Without chemicals, Suffield (CT) is producing better effluent with much of the engineer’s equipment disabled. Worst of all, I have shown the audacity to provide scientific explanations. An unmitigated outrage!

At the risk of getting dead fish snail-mailed my way, I’m using this forum to share one of the very theories that got my counterpart jacked up. Comments, as always, are welcome.

In Modified Ludzack-Ettinger (MLE) process designs, engineers provide pumping equipment to internally recycle 3 to 5 times the influent flow rate. Math drives the designs. By recycling 4Q, 80% of the nitrate produced during nitrification is returned to the anoxic tank for denitrification.

Notwithstanding the beauty of the mathematics, high recycle rates don’t improve nitrogen removal at the treatment plants where I hang. The opposite occurs: too much internal recycling reduces nitrate removal. This fact has perplexed many an engineer.

Most consultants, when confronted with this reality, ascribe it to the recycling of dissolved oxygen back into the anoxic tank, and a resulting increase in anoxic DO. I agree. But. I believe it to be more than that.

And, here’s where I got Rabid Engineer frothing. I believe that the recycle rate affects the hydraulic retention time in the pre-anoxic and aeration tanks. That, when the recycle rate is too high, bacteria spend too few consecutive minutes in anoxic conditions to denitrify.

Bacteria, as those of us in the wastewater biz know, are prolific little copulators. But even these little sexpots require some time to get in the mood: to court one another, enjoy a meal together, and then go about their reproductive business. If they aren’t kept in an anoxic environment long enough, the growth rate is affected and nitrate removal efficiency declines. On the other hand, slowing down the internal recycle rate gives them more time to cozy up to one another and go about their nitrate removing business.

Biology trumps mathematics! That’s my story, and I’m sticking to it.

Thanks for reading.

Grant